Ownership without Owner in the Czech Trust (Sketch on Margo Trust in the Czech Law)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Czech legislator did not address the exceptionality of the ownership (patrimony) law which Quebec Civil Code (CCQ) authorises (a property without owner) for particular purpose as patrimony right by appropriation in the fiducie (trust) regulation when it was adopted into the Czech legal system (§ 1448 of the Czech Civil Code – CCC). However, the Czech law lacks a transposing provision in the sense of Article 2(2) or Article 915 CCQ (‘property belongs to persons or to the state or, in certain cases, is appropriated to a purpose’) justifying deviations from the concept of a uniform ownership right. In accordance with the concept of ownership in Czech law expressed in the mandatory provision of Article 1011 CCC, this right must belong to a certain person. The solution of the “Czech problem” therefore consists in the personification of the trust, which as a legal person has the status of a fiduciary owner of the trust property. This model does not affect the substance of the ownership of the appropriated (trust) property. The Czech trust may dispose of it only in accordance with its purpose, which is expressed in its by-laws. The flexibility of the trust remains fully preserved in this model. During its lifetime, it is possible to change the persons in the position of trustee or beneficiary or to change the purpose of the trust. The implementation of our model can be done by interpreting the applicable legislation (teleological reduction). However, a change in the wording of section 1448 CCC would better contribute to legal certainty.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".