CASEBOOK ENTRY · TICK 47 · OCCURRENCE 34

{
  "available_tick": 43,
  "case_id": "case_0e49a92f59e06b583ace3549",
  "construction": "S3 v1's per-tick extraction-request limit binds only a \"household of record,\" defined by the statute as a household holding a charter entered in the Archive. Where the Archive's recorded lineage instrument is a mine_claim rather than a charter, and no record fact establishes a charter, the lineage is not a household of record, the two-unit limit is not an applicable limit as to it, and S4 sanctions do not attach.",
  "finding": "no_violation",
  "matter_id": "matter_d5b1901e0518a2d311b69cba",
  "precedent_id": "precedent_d83d55ce2fdae85a764fa789",
  "precedent_refs": [
    "precedent_94bc7a85226447cf44f6d4e2",
    "precedent_707767b2e2b8ab89b1d037e4",
    "precedent_6f530701ef830b4343e2a1be",
    "precedent_90de0421cf238747db42b73b",
    "precedent_cec04017e39775fe4bd70b72",
    "precedent_023c2a89864928d0d466c773",
    "precedent_91649852914322c6e977fbf0",
    "precedent_ee36fad1ea006e3b39f657fb",
    "precedent_fc98f4424c1b37ef57d33721",
    "precedent_1f34635cdd493a31f3742bdf",
    "precedent_26be9b7bc1ba57597ce85f92",
    "precedent_d9128e0039d77ba9d963a680",
    "precedent_8dfa3a847974e60ebb975533",
    "precedent_e07e9861d4d532721f0d97ed",
    "precedent_47c2f6680ee608202bd86ec7",
    "precedent_1dd0d482b07a455f1d41c258"
  ],
  "reasoning": "The subject act (act_f6e9c8a1e19e09d376e3c6af, tick 35) is a work_commons action by lineage_d886589df751f87b703e6955 at intensity 2 recording a request of 4,000,000 millionths, i.e. 4 units, with actual depletion of 4,000,000 and food yield of 1,499,943. Under B3 the act is judged under S3 v1, effective tick 1, whose operative commons_quota_units is 2; four requested units facially exceed two. But S3 v1 imposes the limit only on \"a household of record,\" expressly defined as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" The only Archive evidence before the Court is the lineage instrument record for this lineage showing instrument type \"mine_claim\" entered in the Archive. S6 separately lists charters and claims among the records the Archive keeps, confirming they are distinct instruments. No record fact establishes a charter for this lineage, and the Court may not infer unavailable facts. The household-of-record element therefore fails, there is no excess request for S4 to govern, and no sanction attaches. This matter is materially similar to the published constructions under the same statute version, including this same lineage's prior cases (precedent_94bc7a85226447cf44f6d4e2, precedent_707767b2e2b8ab89b1d037e4, precedent_6f530701ef830b4343e2a1be, precedent_90de0421cf238747db42b73b, precedent_cec04017e39775fe4bd70b72), which bind under B3. The defense's arguments about strategic imprudence and inefficiency are immaterial; S3 contains no such elements, and the disposition rests solely on the definitional element. The action record lists no offices, so no S4 disqualification arises. No remedy offers were presented, and none are ordered.",
  "ruling_tick": 42,
  "selected_remedies": [],
  "statute_id": "S3",
  "statute_version": 1
}