La constitutionnalisation de la juridiction inhérente au Canada : origines et fondements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bien que la juridiction inhérente des cours superIeures constitue une notion souvent utilisée par les tribunaux au Canada, plusieurs facettes importantes de cette notion demeurent inconnues et incomprises. Le présent mémoire s'attarde à retracer l'origine et les fondements des pouvoirs inhérents afin d'en expliquer la constitutionnalisation dans l'ordre constitutionnel canadien contemporain. Pour ce faire, nous avons retracé l'essence des pouvoirs inhérents au moyen d'une démarche historique afin d'énoncer une théorie constitutionnelle cohérente des pouvoirs inhérents qui permettra de juger du bien-fondé de leurs nombreuses manifestations contemporaines. L'enchâssement de la juridiction inhérente dans la Constitution canadienne repose sur le statut, la nature et les caractéristiques uniques des cours supérieures. Plus particulièrement, le principe constitutionnel de l'indépendance judiciaire constitue le fondement contemporain de la constitutionnalisation de la juridiction inhérente. Cette constatation permet alors d'avancer l'idée selon laquelle les pouvoirs inhérents nécessaires au maintien de l'indépendance judiciaire des cours supérieures doivent être élevés au rang de normes constitutionnelles supralégislatives.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 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".