Triple

Given a phrase, classify it is english named entity (e.g., persons, organizations, works of art) in Latin script, or not (e.g., literals, dates, URLs, verbose phrases). For disambiguation, the statement where the phrase occurs as object is also given. Please return a JSON object with `phrase` (string, the phrase being analyzed) and `is_ne` (boolean, indicating whether the phrase is a Named Entity).

Phrase: R. v. Badger | Statement: [R. v. Sparrow, precedentFor, R. v. Badger]

Target entity: R. v. Badger
Context triple: [R. v. Sparrow, precedentFor, R. v. Badger]

• A. R. v. Van der Peet
  R. v. Van der Peet is a landmark 1996 Supreme Court of Canada decision that defined the test for recognizing and affirming Aboriginal rights under section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982.
• B. R. v. Nikal
  R. v. Nikal is a Supreme Court of Canada decision that further clarified the scope of Aboriginal fishing rights and the Crown’s fiduciary obligations following the landmark R. v. Sparrow ruling.
• C. R. v. Lavell
  R. v. Lavell is a landmark 1974 Supreme Court of Canada decision that addressed sex discrimination in the Indian Act and tested the scope and effectiveness of the Canadian Bill of Rights in protecting equality rights.
• D. R. v. Drybones
  R. v. Drybones is a landmark 1970 Supreme Court of Canada decision that strengthened the Canadian Bill of Rights by ruling that a law discriminating against an Indigenous person was inoperative because it violated equality rights.
• E. R v Oakes
  R v Oakes is a landmark 1986 Supreme Court of Canada decision that established the proportionality framework used to justify limits on rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
• F. None of above. chosen
• G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.

Target entity: R. v. Badger
Target entity description: R. v. Badger is a landmark Supreme Court of Canada decision that clarified the scope and interpretation of Indigenous treaty rights to hunt under Canadian law.

• A. R. v. Van der Peet
  R. v. Van der Peet is a landmark 1996 Supreme Court of Canada decision that defined the test for recognizing and affirming Aboriginal rights under section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982.
• B. R. v. Nikal
  R. v. Nikal is a Supreme Court of Canada decision that further clarified the scope of Aboriginal fishing rights and the Crown’s fiduciary obligations following the landmark R. v. Sparrow ruling.
• C. R. v. Lavell
  R. v. Lavell is a landmark 1974 Supreme Court of Canada decision that addressed sex discrimination in the Indian Act and tested the scope and effectiveness of the Canadian Bill of Rights in protecting equality rights.
• D. R. v. Drybones
  R. v. Drybones is a landmark 1970 Supreme Court of Canada decision that strengthened the Canadian Bill of Rights by ruling that a law discriminating against an Indigenous person was inoperative because it violated equality rights.
• E. R v Oakes
  R v Oakes is a landmark 1986 Supreme Court of Canada decision that established the proportionality framework used to justify limits on rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
• F. None of above. chosen