CASEBOOK ENTRY · TICK 36 · OCCURRENCE 15

{
  "available_tick": 27,
  "case_id": "case_a3be8381da8867705bf0f8b3",
  "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_84703bd6ae96413015d83938",
  "precedent_id": "precedent_6f530701ef830b4343e2a1be",
  "precedent_refs": [
    "precedent_94bc7a85226447cf44f6d4e2",
    "precedent_707767b2e2b8ab89b1d037e4",
    "precedent_023c2a89864928d0d466c773",
    "precedent_91649852914322c6e977fbf0",
    "precedent_ee36fad1ea006e3b39f657fb",
    "precedent_fc98f4424c1b37ef57d33721",
    "precedent_1f34635cdd493a31f3742bdf",
    "precedent_26be9b7bc1ba57597ce85f92",
    "precedent_d9128e0039d77ba9d963a680",
    "precedent_8dfa3a847974e60ebb975533",
    "precedent_e07e9861d4d532721f0d97ed",
    "precedent_47c2f6680ee608202bd86ec7"
  ],
  "reasoning": "The subject act (act_18da5dc74c6f3762fe86e998, tick 24) is a work_commons action by lineage_d886589df751f87b703e6955 recording a request of 4,000,000 millionths, i.e. 4 units, with matching depletion and yield. Under B3 the act is judged under S3 v1, effective tick 1, whose operative commons_quota_units is 2; four 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 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. 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), which bind under B3. The household-of-record element failing, there is no excess request for S4 to govern. The defense's arguments about corrective intent and matching request and depletion are not reached; S3 contains no such elements. The recorded offices list is empty, so no S4 disqualification arises, and no remedy offers were presented.",
  "ruling_tick": 26,
  "selected_remedies": [],
  "statute_id": "S3",
  "statute_version": 1
}