LIABILITY IN INTERNATIONAL AIR LAW: CURRENT STATUS AND PROSPECTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION IN UKRAINIAN LEGISLATION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article is devoted to the analysis of the current state and prospects of implementation of the norms of the institute of liability in international air law into Ukrainian legislation. It is argued that the institution of liability in international air law, in our opinion, is one of the main instruments for ensuring the implementation of its norms and, at the same time, one of its weakest points (which may seem paradoxical, but, in the author's opinion, is quite logical, given the historical conditions and political and economic realities). It is noted that Ukraine, as an aviation state, has always taken an active part in the development of international air law as a member of the UN and ICAO, a party to international conventions and other international treaties and documents. However, there are some problems with the implementation of international air law norms on liability into Ukrainian legislation. It is concluded that existing liability mechanisms in international aviation law are not sufficiently effective, but new ones do not fully correspond to modern realities: they do not take into account new challenges of today (cyber threats, hybrid use of UAVs near airports to disrupt their operation, and the use of electronic warfare which threatens the safety of air navigation, to commit acts of unlawful interference), contain many of the above-mentioned bottlenecks and compromises (states are reluctant to take on new international obligations, especially those that provide for the liability of the states themselves). However, even with these “half-hearted” steps to update the institution of liability in international air law, Ukraine has so far acceded to only one relatively new international treaty—the 1999 Montreal Convention. The prospects for Ukraine's accession to the 2010 Beijing documents and the 2014 Montreal Protocol are, in our opinion, quite realistic, but a thorough scientific assessment of the compatibility of such accession with Ukraine's national interests is necessary. As for the new 2009 Montreal Conventions, the prospects for Ukraine's accession are doubtful, as these conventions have not yet entered into force and may not do so. In addition, Ukraine is still not a party to even the existing 1952 Rome Convention and the 1978 Protocol with the 1978 Montreal Protocol. Keywords: Implementation of international air law provisions on liability into Ukrainian legislation; responsibility for acts of unlawful interference with civil aviation; acts of unlawful interference with civil aviation; air piracy; the liability of the aircraft operator for damage to third parties caused by acts of unlawful interference; air carrier's liability for damage caused to a party to an air transport contract by an act of unlawful interference.
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 | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".