MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7010788264

Justifying the application of the theory of efficient breach specifically within the context of commercial contracting.
\n

2018· dissertation· en· W7010788264 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueWhite Rose eTheses Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) · 2018
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal principles and applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGoldcorp
KeywordsContext (archaeology)LimitingFrame (networking)Meaning (existential)DerogationSet (abstract data type)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis provides a functional, and justifiable application of the theory of the efficient breach of \ncontract within the commercial context. Limiting the theory’s application in this way is the primary \noriginal contribution. This is because the theory of efficient breach has not been explicitly applied \nsolely to the commercial setting previously. This is legitimate because the underlying intention \nbehind commercial contracting is profit generation. As such, maximising the wealth which flows \nfrom commercial contracts will be the focus of the parties involved. An additional original \ncontribution is that this thesis represents the first major discussion of efficient breach which applies \nthe theory to English law. \n \nThis thesis also makes additional contributions. A definition of “commercial” in a contract law \ncontext is established to frame the discussion that is to follow. It is then outlined that the fundamental \nstructure of English contract law will remain the same whether a dispute concerns a commercial, or \na non-commercial contract. However, there is a difference in the approach of the court where rights \nare pursued for commercial, profit driven reasons in contrast with rights that are of a personal nature. \nNext, it is set out that in English law, promise is not the basis of contract. As such, the efficient breach \nof commercial contracts cannot be discounted based on issues of morality which are linked to \npromise breaking. Numerous other criticisms which have been directed at efficient breach are also \ndiscounted. \n \nUltimately, a legitimate formulation of the efficient breach of commercial contracts is outlined. This \niteration is permissive, rather than mandatory. It provides efficient optionality, meaning that where \na party has the opportunity to breach efficiently, it will not necessarily take place. However, should \na party choose to breach, they will be justified. This is a departure from more prescriptive approaches.

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)0.012
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.027
Scholarly communication0.0060.009
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0060.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.229 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWhite Rose eTheses Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York)Same topicLegal principles and applicationsFrench-language works237,207