In Andrews v. Grand & Toy Alta. Ltd., 1978 CanLII 1 (SCC), [1978] 2 S.C.R. 229, [1978] 1 W.W.R. 577, 3 C.C.L.T. 225, 83 D.L.R. (3d) 452 at 478, 8 A.R. 182, 19 N.R. 50, Dickson J. (as he then was) for the court states: “It is customary to set only one figure for all non-pecuniary loss, including such factors as pain and suffering, loss of amenities, and loss of expectation of life. This is a sound practice. Although these elements are analytically distinct, they overlap and merge at the edges and in practice. To suffer pain is surely to lose an amenity of a happy life at that time. To lose years of one’s expectation of life is to lose all amenities for the lost period, and to cause mental pain and suffering in the contemplation of this prospect. These problems, as well as the fact that these losses have the common trait of irreplaceability, favour a composite award for all non-pecuniary losses.” (The italics are mine.)
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.