MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387654276 · doi:10.54648/bula2023023

Rethinking Directors’ Statutory Fiduciary Duties in the Commonwealth Caribbean: Should Sequana be Followed?

2023· article· en· W4387654276 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Akeem Lopez

Bibliographic record

VenueBusiness Law Review · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Insolvency and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFiduciaryCommonwealthDutyCreditorStatutory lawLawHigh CourtPolitical scienceSupreme courtCompanies ActBusinessCorporate lawAccountingEconomicsManagementCorporate governanceDebtFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The scope and nature of directors’ duties has been the subject of much judicial and academic debate. In the recent BTI 2014 LLC v. Sequana SA decision, the UK Supreme Court firmly established the creditor duty in English company law. This paper proposes to examine the basis and nature of the duty including its Commonwealth origin. The focal point of this paper is to determine the question of whether such a creditor duty would be accepted as existing by courts in the Commonwealth Caribbean. In providing the answer to that question, this article makes reference to numerous Canadian cases in which the question was answered and many scholarly works which advocate against the creditor duty. Commonwealth, Commonwealth Caribbean, Directors’ Fiduciary Duty, Creditor Duty, BTI 2014 LLC v. Sequana, Companies Act

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.732
Threshold uncertainty score0.540

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.011
Scholarly communication0.0100.005
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0060.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.165 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBusiness Law ReviewSame topicCorporate Insolvency and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207