DÉVELOPPEMENTS RÉCENTS : LES ORDONNANCES D’INJONCTION DE TYPE ANTON PILLER, MAREVA ET NORWICH EN MATIÈRE DE FRAUDE COMMERCIALE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ce texte explore les plus récentes décisions jurisprudentielles en matière d’ordonnance d’injonction de type Anton Piller, Mareva et Norwich dans le contexte de la fraude commerciale. L’importance de ces recours extraordinaires en droit canadien et québécois est maintenant bien reconnue. Depuis la décision de la Cour suprême dans Celanese Canada inc. c. Murray Demolition Corp. (2006 CSC 36), la Cour d’appel du Québec a récemment eu l’opportunité de continuer son éclairage en matière d’ordonnance Anton Piller dans l’affaire IMS Health Canada inc. c. Th!nk Business Insights ltd. (2013 QCCA 1303). En matière d’ordonnance de type Mareva ou Norwich, les cours québécoises continuent de les utiliser de plus en plus et leur efficacité est reconnue. À une époque où la fraude commerciale est omniprésente, l’application de ces recours extraordinaires demeure un enjeu de taille pour les tribunaux, les procureurs et les parties, vu leur complexité et leur impact sur les défendeurs. Ces recours extraordinaires demeurent des outils indispensables pour le juriste qui représente les intérêts d’un justiciable ou d’une entreprise qui est victime de fraude commerciale.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.019 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".