MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4253130352 · doi:10.1017/s0309067100065102

Opinion 1/17

2020· article· en· W4253130352 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Law Reports · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInternational Arbitration and Investment Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJurisdictionLawPolitical scienceInternational lawExclusive jurisdictionEuropean Union lawEuropean unionInternational trade lawOriginal jurisdictionInternational tradeBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Economics, trade and finance — Free trade agreements — International investment — “New generation” free trade agreements — Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, 2016 (“CETA”) — Whether CETA’s investor–State dispute settlement provisions compatible with EU primary law — Principle of autonomy of EU legal order — Principle of equal treatment — Requirement of effectiveness of EU law — Right of access to an independent and impartial tribunal — Article 47 of Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, 2000 Treaties — Interpretation — Application — Free trade agreements — International investment — “New generation” free trade agreements — CETA — European Union and non-member States Parties to international agreement — Agreements integral part of EU law and subject of references for preliminary ruling to Court of Justice of the EU — Compatibility of agreements with EU Treaties, constitutional principles and EU Charter — Court of Justice of the EU having jurisdiction to interpret and apply agreements — Whether jurisdiction of Court of Justice of the EU taking precedence over jurisdiction of court of non-member State — Reciprocal nature of international agreements — Maintenance of powers of European Union in international relations — Whether jurisdiction of Court of Justice of the EU taking precedence over jurisdiction of international courts and tribunals established by agreements — Whether EU law precluding agreement from providing for creation of tribunals — Whether EU law precluding agreement from conferring jurisdiction on those tribunals to interpret and apply provisions of agreement having regard to rules and principles of international law applicable between Parties — Whether conditions applicable Jurisdiction — Court of Justice of EU — EU and non-member States Parties to international agreement — CETA — Court of non-member State — Agreement providing for creation of tribunals — Agreement conferring jurisdiction on those tribunals to interpret and apply provisions of agreement having regard to rules and principles of international law applicable between Parties — Whether precluded by EU law — Whether jurisdiction of Court of Justice of EU having precedence — Whether CETA conferring jurisdiction on CETA Tribunal to interpret or apply EU law — Whether CETA adversely affecting autonomy of EU legal order 545 Damages — CETA Tribunal — CETA Appellate Tribunal — Whether CETA tribunals having jurisdiction to award damages to Canadian investors for loss suffered through EU acts of general application setting the level of protection of a public interest adversely affecting autonomy of EU legal order — Whether damages granted for a fine for breach of EU competition law found to constitute an infringement of CETA undermining the principle of effectiveness of EU law International tribunals — CETA Tribunal — CETA Appellate Tribunal — Whether Article 47 of Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, 2000 applicable to dispute resolution fora created by EU’s international agreements — Whether CETA tribunals satisfying requirements of accessibility, independence and impartiality — Whether small and medium-sized enterprises’ right of access to CETA tribunals impaired by the “loser pays” principle — Whether powers of CETA Joint Committee to appoint and remove Members of CETA tribunals, to determine their remuneration and to issue binding interpretations of CETA respecting requirement of independence — Whether CETA sufficiently guaranteeing impartiality of Members of CETA tribunals vis-à-vis disputing parties and government of their State of origin Jurisdiction — CETA Tribunal — CETA Appellate Tribunal — Whether CETA tribunals having jurisdiction to assess compatibility of EU acts of general application setting the level of protection of a public interest adversely affecting autonomy of EU legal order Relationship of international law and municipal law — EU law as domestic law — Application or interpretation of domestic law as a matter of fact — Whether power of CETA tribunals to take EU law into account as a matter of fact compatible with principle of autonomy of EU legal order Treaties — Free trade agreements — International investment — “New generation” free trade agreements — CETA — Equal treatment of Canadian and EU investors — Whether granting access to CETA’s investor–State dispute settlement provisions for investments made in EU only to Canadian investors constituting discrimination — Whether Canadian and EU investors investing in EU in comparable situations — The law of the European Union

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Law ReportsSame topicInternational Arbitration and Investment LawFrench-language works237,207