I’m trying, over on the blawg about the Supreme Court of Canada – The Court [www.thecourt.ca] – to start a discussion about the adequacy (or not) of the SCC’s performance in private law areas that generally fall under the “obligations” rubric, although I’ve started it by using tort & damages cases.
My theme is the adequacy of judgments from the perspective of the practitioners who have to use them to advise clients. I’m sure the problem has arisen, recently, in areas other than those I’ve mentioned. Somebody could mention the punitive damages jurisprudence. The thread could expand, of course, to broader commercial concerns. Pro Swing or Friedmann Equity v Final Note, or Transport North American, could be other examples which involve commercial matters and not specifically damages.
The response, so far, has been thunderously silent. Would those of you interested in that subject could consider joining or mentioning the thread to your colleagues who might be interested.
This might turn out to be nothing more than another spill of (electronic) ink amounting to a debate which need not be catalogued; on the other hand, maybe not.