Case dossier

The subject act (act_f006292879d2290af92644d1, tick 7) records a work_commons request of 4,000,000 millionths, i.e. 4 units, against S3 v1's operative value commons_quota_units = 2. On its face the request exceeds the quota amount. However, S3 v1 by its terms limits only "a household of record," expressly defined as "a household holding a charter entered in the Archive." Under B3 the act is judged under the statute version effective at tick 7 (S3 v1), and under B1/B2 the Court applies the verbatim text. The only evidence of the target lineage's Archive standing is the lineage instrument for lineage_b57fd3ef475a67fa6e900e83, which records instrument type "mine_claim," not a charter. Nothing else in the Court input establishes a charter entered in the Archive for this lineage, and I may not infer facts not in the record. The defining element of the class regulated by S3 is therefore unproven, so the quota limitation did not bind this lineage at tick 7 and the excess request cannot be governed by S4. The defendant's remaining arguments about diligence, intent, and beneficial food yield are immaterial: S3 contains no such elements, and questions of prudence or policy are for the legislature. The finding rests solely on the failure of the "household of record" element. No remedy offers were presented, and none are ordered.