MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7133018460

Application of the oppression remedy: The "reasonable expectation" test

2008· dissertation· W7133018460 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yilan Jiang

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2008
Typedissertation
Language
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Law and Human Rights
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOppressionCorporationTest (biology)Action (physics)Scope (computer science)Power (physics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The adoption of the oppression remedy in Canada empowers the corporation stakeholders to bring an action against the corporation when the conduct of the corporation has an effect that is oppressive, unfairly prejudicial, or unfairly disregards the interests of a stakeholder. However, according to S.241 of the CBCA, it provides a wide scope of the oppression and gives a court a wide power in defining the specific oppression case. Although there is no clear guidance in the application of the oppression remedy in Canada, it has been widely recognized that courts gravitate towards using a test of "Reasonable Expectation" of the complaint in the judicial application of the oppression remedy. The purpose of the thesis is to briefly introduce the evolvement of the test and focus on the determination of the "reasonableness" in the judicial exercise of the discretion.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.360
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicCorporate Law and Human RightsFrench-language works237,207