Long Overdue: A Reappraisal of Section 121 of the\nConstitution Act, 1867
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article offers a new interpretation of s. 121 of the Constitution Act, 1867. The author re-evaluates the traditional interpretation of s. 121, found in Gold Seal Limited v. The Attorney General of the Province of Alberta. That interpretation limited the application of s. 121 to prohibiting interprovincial "customs duties" but nothing else. The author analyzes s. 121 using a purposive approach. After reviewing the provision's wording, legislative history, legislative context and its place within the scheme of the Act, the article concludes that a purposive and progressive interpretation leads to a more robust role for s. 121. Thus interpreted, s. 121 would prohibit any impediment to the free flow of goods across Canada and the imposition of any obligation on the movement of Canadian goods that in its essence is related to a provincial boundary, subject to regulation of subsidiary features. The author also analyzes Gold Seal and other s. 121 jurisprudence. He contends that the Supreme Court's interpretation of s. 121 in Gold Seal is inconsistent with the modern purposive approach to constitutional interpretation and resulted from expediency.
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 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".