In authors or contributors

Rethinking Damages for Personal Injury: Is it Too Late to Take the Facts Seriously?

Resource type
Author/contributor
Title
Rethinking Damages for Personal Injury: Is it Too Late to Take the Facts Seriously?
Abstract
It is just a little over thirty years since the Supreme Court of Canada took Canada’s assessment of personal injury damages on a different tack in the trilogy. In hindsight, the view then taken on damages for non-pecuniary loss was prescient, for it foreshadowed movements now taken legislatively in the United States and Australia, and has parallels in the English Court of Appeal decision in Heil v. Rankin. The Supreme Court did not tackle the issue of lump sum verses periodic payment/reassessment in the trilogy, although it did express its views on this issue many years later. For obvious constitutional and jurisprudential reasons touching on the appropriate limits of judicial activism, and, one suspects, out of personal belief, the Supreme Court did not question the underlying premise of providing compensation for personal injury as a result of tortious conduct. The success of the Supreme Court’s intervention is perhaps best revealed by the fact that apart from some minor skirmishes over automobile insurance, there has never been any real clamour in Canada for tort reform, or an insurance crisis similar to the experience in the United States and Australia.
Genre
SSRN Scholarly Paper
Archive ID
2006586
Place
Rochester, NY
Date
2009
Accessed
9/29/23, 7:20 PM
Short Title
Rethinking Damages for Personal Injury
Language
en
Library Catalog
Social Science Research Network
Citation
Berryman, J. (2009). Rethinking Damages for Personal Injury: Is it Too Late to Take the Facts Seriously? (SSRN Scholarly Paper 2006586). https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2006586
Author / Editor