LA CÉLÉBRATION DU MARIAGE DOIT RESPECTER LES PRESCRIPTIONS DU CODE CIVIL DU QUÉBEC, QU’ELLE REVÊTE OU NON UN CARACTÈRE RELIGIEUX
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le ministre du culte habilité à célébrer le mariage a-t-il le devoir légal d’en déclarer l’existence au directeur de l’état civil de sorte à lui procurer les effets juridiques que la loi rattache au statut matrimonial? Non, si l’on en croit le récent jugement de la Cour supérieure rendu dans l’affaire Droit de la famille — 16244, 2016 QCCS 410. Souscrivant à l’interprétation de la Procureure générale du Québec, le tribunal estime que les règles adoptées lors de la réforme du Code civil de 1994 permettent aux ministres du culte de célébrer des mariages exclusivement religieux. Une telle interprétation prête flanc à la critique. Conjuguée à l’analyse du contexte juridique prévalant avant la réforme, l’étude des différents textes provinciaux et fédéraux qui gouvernent aujourd’hui la célébration du mariage confirme la volonté du législateur de maintenir le lien indissoluble entre les dimensions religieuse et civile des mariages célébrés par un ministre du culte.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.001 |
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.
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".