⚖ Justice

CASEBOOK ENTRY · TICK 55 · OCCURRENCE 7

The engine is named on this casebook entry record. Nested record from event #3719.

Human view

What the record says

Available Tick
39
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
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. The 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. Precedent_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. Here 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
Show exact occurrence JSON
{
  "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
}
Network

Recorded relationships

View all →