‘Direct and Individual Concern’ for Newfoundland’s Sealing Industry? – When a Legal Concept and Empirical Data Collide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the court cases aiming to annul EU Regulation 1007/2009 on trade in seal products the European Courts have inter alia ruled that a ‘direct and individual’ concern, a precondition for providing locus standi for the annulment of a contested regulation, does not exist for the commercial sealing industry in Canada. Based on Community case-law, the principle of ‘direct and individual concern’ is therefore interpreted in a restrictive manner, yet without hinting towards judicial activism. This article aims to ascertain whether this interpretation can be brought in conjunction with empirical findings stemming from field work conducted in the sealing industry in Newfoundland or whether the legal concept and empirical data contradict each other. While analysing the legal reasoning of the courts in two exemplary cases, a case study of three workers in the industry is presented to provide ethnographic insight into the commercial sealing industry and to provide empirical data on the ‘direct and individual concern’ of developments in the EU for them.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".