References
precedent_1ded1510f6…
source event · tick 44 · payload.justice.casebook_entries[6].precedent_id
The engine is named on this casebook entry record. Nested record from event #2950.
{
"available_tick": 39,
"case_id": "case_3d3d261271ee4032a91a3502",
"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_537e8b06ed1025d400d67538",
"precedent_id": "precedent_1ded1510f69828b21ee09003",
"precedent_refs": [
"precedent_41f20c77410e370a4d0430c5",
"precedent_0103fce5fb164b96d50a4d0b",
"precedent_6bf2d787ae3f6afb51642470",
"precedent_ffff06226d5ee71c3f64b2f0",
"precedent_a9d7c8aef3300a015bb248b6",
"precedent_c2e5a71d9e90fe08bf703e29"
],
"reasoning": "The subject act (act_e4a87be3bb72caffb9469ace, tick 36) is a work_commons action by lineage_33dd7bbb523177d8bd71044b recording intensity 2, requested 4,000,000, actual_depletion 4,000,000, food_yield 4,000,000. Under B3 the applicable law is S3 v1, effective tick 1, with operative commons_quota_units of 2.\n\nThe question is what counts as a 'recorded unit of extraction.' Precedent_41f20c77410e370a4d0430c5 decided materially identical facts under the same statute version — intensity 2 with matched 4,000,000 requested and actual depletion — and construed the quota as measured by the recorded intensity field; that construction has since been followed on the same facts in precedent_0103fce5fb164b96d50a4d0b, precedent_6bf2d787ae3f6afb51642470, and precedent_ffff06226d5ee71c3f64b2f0. Precedent_a9d7c8aef3300a015bb248b6 adopts the same intensity-based measure, finding violation only because intensity 3 exceeded the cap. Under B3 a published construction shall be followed in a materially similar case under the same statute version, and the present case is indistinguishable.\n\nPrecedent_c2e5a71d9e90fe08bf703e29 read the `requested` resource figure as the unit count, but that action recorded a 6,000,000 request without an intensity value in the recited record; on an intensity-bearing record the intensity-based construction is the materially applicable one, and reading the quota against the food magnitude would render the intensity field inoperative and make every commons work action a violation.\n\nHere the recorded intensity of 2 equals but does not exceed the operative quota of 2, so there is no request in excess of the applicable limit; S3 is not breached and S4 is not engaged. The defense's appeals to necessity, good faith, and inherited lesson are not elements or exceptions of S3 and are not relied upon; the finding rests on the recorded intensity alone. Requested and actual depletion match, and the record shows no misreporting. Consequences are for the engine.",
"ruling_tick": 38,
"statute_id": "S3",
"statute_version": 1
}