The case makes extensive use of ODG member Erik Knutsen's "Clarifying Causation in Tort” (2010), 33 Dal. L.J. 153. (A near penultimate version exists on SSRN.)

On first reading of Clements, there’s some good and some bad in the analysis. For those who care to read more, I've written something about it on the University of Alberta Faculty of Law Blog, here.

http://ualbertalaw.typepad.com/faculty/2010/12/-and-the-bcca-shall-lead-them.html#more

The result, as I see it, is more support for the view that Russ Brown and I share that Resurfice, so far, has made a whit of signficant difference in the results of cases. It isn't helping plaintiffs. It isn't hurting defendants.

It is probably helping (some) lawyers' billings though and, of course, contributing to the continued spilling of ink.

Cheers,

David Cheifetz