My area is patent remedies, and I'm working on a comment on Nova v Dow 2022 SCC 43, and I am learning more about disgorgement remedies generally. Is the majority decision in Atlantic Lottery 2020 SCC 19 at paras 23-38 considered generally sound in its discussion of principles: eg the history and rationale for the disgorgement remedy, the distinction between restitution for unjust enrichment and disgorgement for wrongdoing as being two types of gain‑based remedy etc. I'm not asking whether there is a consensus as to whether the court was right to reject waiver of tort as a cause of action. 

In my area, patent law, it's not uncommon that the SCC is wrong, to a greater or lesser degree, in its statements about general principles or the traditional application of particular doctrines. I'm wondering if the SCC discussion of general principles in Atlantic Lottery is fairly reliable, or if I have to take it all with a large grain of salt. I don't want to write "In the general law of disgorgement the principle is X" citing Atlantic Lottery, and then have all the experts let me know that the SCC was wrong on that point. I know this question is open-ended and I will in any event follow up with the academic sources on points of particular interest, but I thought I'd ask if there are any particular traps I should watch out for. 

Thanks

Norman

Norman Siebrasse
Professor of Law
University of New Brunswick
Sufficient Description.com