Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 09:36:30 -0500

From: David Cheifetz

Subject: Punitive damages for negligence

Constitutional law isn't my forté. (We used Ron Atkey's text when I studied it in first year - that'll tell some of you how long ago that was.) Apart from that, why should the punishment aspect make punitive damages pith and substance criminal? Or even enough of an overlap to make it enough of an overlap to invoke paramountcy?

If I remember things properly, the province is entitled, within the scope of its jurisdiction, to punish for breach of provincial law so long as the punishment isn't one justifiable only? substantially only? on grounds valid only under the criminal law. (Apologies if that's wrong.)

Oh, and tort law compensatory awards have a punishment aspect too (according to Whiten) but we'll pretend we didn't read that.

David

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jason Neyers
Sent: November 8, 2006 8:56 AM
To: Allan Beever
Subject: Re: ODG: RE: 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.

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