Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 08:56:04 -0500

From: Jason Neyers

Subject: Punitive damages for negligence

It appears that there would be an overlap and hence that both levels of government could deal with it subject to the paramountcy doctrine. This just raises the further question of why the federal criminal code is not paramount in this situation.

----- Original Message -----
From: Allan Beever
Date: Wednesday, November 8, 2006 8:41 am
Subject: Re: ODG: RE: punitive damages for negligence

Isn't there an argument that punitive damages should be a federal matter under 91(27) of the Constitution Act 1867? It was a while ago that I studied this, of course, but I do seem to remember that the issue there was not whether the matter was officially part of the criminal law, but whether it had a criminal purpose. Ross v RMV? (Actually, I think I answered a question on this in my constitutional law exam). On that understanding, it seems more than arguable that punitive damages fall into the federal jurisdiction. Is there any case law or commentary on this?

--
Jason Neyers
January Term Director
Associate Professor of Law
Faculty of Law
University of Western Ontario
N6A 3K7
(519) 661-2111 x. 88435

<<<< Previous Message  ~  Index  ~  Next Message >>>>>