CASEBOOK ENTRY · TICK 52 · OCCURRENCE 21

{
  "available_tick": 52,
  "case_id": "case_8f8f89c6f3559f1b0e48e4e3",
  "construction": "Under S3 v1, the '2 recorded units of extraction from the commons' are measured by the `intensity` field recorded on a work_commons action, not by the resource magnitudes in `requested`, `actual_depletion`, or `food_yield`. An action recording intensity at or below the operative commons_quota_units makes no request in excess of the applicable limit, and S4 is not engaged.",
  "finding": "no_violation",
  "matter_id": "matter_9e505b5238503c40327bf889",
  "precedent_id": "precedent_6e9049fbb80a17ac12c757d2",
  "precedent_refs": [
    "precedent_41f20c77410e370a4d0430c5",
    "precedent_0103fce5fb164b96d50a4d0b",
    "precedent_6bf2d787ae3f6afb51642470",
    "precedent_ffff06226d5ee71c3f64b2f0",
    "precedent_1ded1510f69828b21ee09003",
    "precedent_8fc9d140bda2ac2470502ce9",
    "precedent_a11d4e6389c6f7d97d48706c",
    "precedent_06b68f0db9ca450f9e26ad85",
    "precedent_96307324b2fb5cdd852ec52c",
    "precedent_a1b65ce108f95d4041f5292a",
    "precedent_5e19b68444dadd7a242c397e",
    "precedent_f4557190f9ba8449537756d7",
    "precedent_331d293bd4d141d615ec1f49",
    "precedent_c1d83af9bd82f23ff6cccb83",
    "precedent_3157031f402fa096bafb88e5",
    "precedent_4f1f55167d62fe3f0bbad146"
  ],
  "reasoning": "The subject act (act_ef165f5551ba5bbacae35eb6, tick 49) is a work_commons action by lineage_5cc3266b99b1d89c0f8d7720 recording intensity 2, requested 4,000,000, actual_depletion 4,000,000, food_yield 2,983,490, with no offices held. Under B3 the applicable law is S3 v1, effective tick 1, with operative commons_quota_units fixed at 2.\n\nThe settled construction under this statute version measures the quota by the recorded intensity field: precedent_41f20c77410e370a4d0430c5 decided materially identical facts (intensity 2 with a 4,000,000 request), followed in precedent_0103fce5fb164b96d50a4d0b, precedent_6bf2d787ae3f6afb51642470, precedent_ffff06226d5ee71c3f64b2f0, precedent_1ded1510f69828b21ee09003, precedent_8fc9d140bda2ac2470502ce9, precedent_a11d4e6389c6f7d97d48706c, precedent_06b68f0db9ca450f9e26ad85, precedent_96307324b2fb5cdd852ec52c, precedent_a1b65ce108f95d4041f5292a, precedent_5e19b68444dadd7a242c397e (same lineage), precedent_f4557190f9ba8449537756d7, precedent_331d293bd4d141d615ec1f49, precedent_c1d83af9bd82f23ff6cccb83, and precedent_3157031f402fa096bafb88e5 — the last on virtually the same figures including a food_yield of 2,983,490. Precedent_a9d7c8aef3300a015bb248b6 and precedent_4f1f55167d62fe3f0bbad146 apply the same intensity-based measure to this same lineage, finding violation only because intensity there was 3. Under B3 that published construction shall be followed here.\n\nThe contrary reading in precedent_c2e5a71d9e90fe08bf703e29, treating the `requested` food magnitude as the unit count, rested on a 6,000,000 request without a recited intensity value and is not materially similar; adopting it would render the intensity field inoperative and make every commons work action a violation.\n\nApplying the controlling construction, the recorded units of extraction are 2, equal to but not in excess of the operative quota of 2. The shortfall between actual_depletion of 4,000,000 and food_yield of 2,983,490 concerns the productivity of the labor, not the number of extraction units requested, and is immaterial to S3. There being no excess request, S3 is not breached and S4 is not engaged. The defense's appeals to good faith, inherited lessons, expiry of a prior suspension, and absence of harm are not elements or exceptions of S3 and are not relied upon; the finding rests solely on the recorded intensity. Consequences are for the engine.",
  "ruling_tick": 51,
  "statute_id": "S3",
  "statute_version": 1
}