CASEBOOK ENTRY · TICK 40 · OCCURRENCE 17

{
  "available_tick": 34,
  "case_id": "case_41ec406c74c4ad2bde4b86a8",
  "casebook_version": "0.2",
  "construction": "S3 v1 imposes its per-tick extraction limit only on \"a household of record,\" a term the statute itself defines as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" That charter predicate is an essential element and must appear on the record. An Archive-entered instrument of another type — here a mine_claim — is not a charter (S6 lists charters and claims as distinct Archive records) and does not establish household-of-record status. Where no charter entered in the Archive is shown for the lineage, S3's limit does not bind it and no excess-request violation arises whatever quantity was requested; S4, which operates on \"an S3 violation,\" is likewise not engaged.",
  "finding": "no_violation",
  "matter_id": "matter_94c0a4c6d37ca9f35f5bfd51",
  "precedent_id": "precedent_4ee83e48a9cde43789c551e6",
  "precedent_refs": [
    "precedent_c6b253687471a4bfc09c84a5",
    "precedent_5ea57ec9b97d848b9daa0a9d",
    "precedent_53e09e3fca696206952f25c8",
    "precedent_3f1618f16aa0b420767c242d",
    "precedent_ddf226262182da24404ac376",
    "precedent_188537a6b47e703b634d5879",
    "precedent_26f3e820281f6d5a8e6ccc6e",
    "precedent_587453cda6cf39bdd9ed070f",
    "precedent_41eafe11eedfa49607ed9cdd",
    "precedent_5fd1efed2df6eea644136a73",
    "precedent_0727fa3700a57e467944e5ea",
    "precedent_ff40716c40463e77acc44449",
    "precedent_a43fa8d0ed45852eb8b53956",
    "precedent_4b768caf2a45e42f41758639",
    "precedent_d439460a0df60e2b0facc424"
  ],
  "reasoning": "The subject action (act_b381f8aefb9d9d2c3e154f75, tick 32) is a work_commons record showing requested 6,000,000 millionths, i.e. 6 whole units, against S3 v1's operative commons_quota_units = 2, the version effective from tick 1 and applicable under B3. The defence's contentions that the action is a commons draw rather than a mine_claim extraction, and that the small actual_depletion (55,186) and food_yield (858) show no excess, would not answer the statute: S3 bounds the recorded request itself, and depletion and yield bear only on the S4 restoration measure. Appeals to survival need and good faith are matters of equity or policy for the legislature.\n\nThe case nevertheless turns on the threshold element. S3 v1 limits only \"a household of record,\" expressly defined as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" The sole Archive evidence supplied is the lineage-instrument record for lineage_56c2f93d2e44581833c3d9cd, whose instrument type is \"mine_claim,\" not a charter; S6 treats charters and claims as distinct Archive records, and I may not infer an unavailable charter record. Household-of-record status is therefore unproven, the two-unit limit did not bind this lineage at tick 32, and no S3 violation is established.\n\nThe published constructions in precedent_c6b253687471a4bfc09c84a5, precedent_5ea57ec9b97d848b9daa0a9d, precedent_53e09e3fca696206952f25c8, precedent_3f1618f16aa0b420767c242d, precedent_ddf226262182da24404ac376, precedent_188537a6b47e703b634d5879, precedent_26f3e820281f6d5a8e6ccc6e, precedent_587453cda6cf39bdd9ed070f, precedent_41eafe11eedfa49607ed9cdd, precedent_5fd1efed2df6eea644136a73, precedent_0727fa3700a57e467944e5ea, precedent_ff40716c40463e77acc44449, precedent_a43fa8d0ed45852eb8b53956 and precedent_4b768caf2a45e42f41758639 address materially similar cases under the same statute version (an over-limit work_commons request by a lineage whose only Archive instrument is a mine_claim) and hold the charter predicate an element; under B3 they are followed. To the extent precedent_d439460a0df60e2b0facc424 suggests a ceiling binds a non-chartered lineage, it did not construe the definitional element and finds no anchor in the text.\n\nNo office is recorded for the actor at the subject tick (offices empty). remedy_offers is empty, so no discretionary remedy is selected.",
  "ruling_tick": 33,
  "selected_remedies": [],
  "statute_id": "S3",
  "statute_version": 1
}