T: 416-862-4836 email JulieView full profile.
T: 613-761-2424 email CharlesView full profile.
T: 416-862-4837 email RichardView full profile.
T: 613-217-8521 email John View full profile.
T: 416-862-4825 email MatthewView full profile.
T: 416-862-4826 email JohnView full profile.
T: 416-862-4820 email MarcView full profile.
T: 416-862-4831 email CarlView full profile.
T: 416-642-4874 email AlessiaView full profile.
T: 416-642-4877 email KipView full profile.
T: 416-642-4876 email SydneyView full profile.
T: 416-862-4823 email AmandaView full profile.
T: 416-862-4829 email AnandView full profile.
T: 416-862-4828 email JacquelynView full profile.
T: 416-862-4835 email JenniferView full profile.
T: 416-862-4830 email JoannaView full profile.
T: 416-642-4873 email LaurenView full profile.
Environment • Aboriginal • Energy
In civil lawsuits for losses due to soil and groundwater contamination, plaintiffs often quantify their damages as either:
In Midwest Properties Ltd. v Thordarson ("Midwest"), the Ontario Court of Appeal held that the Court’s preferred method is to quantify damages by evaluating the cost to remediate the plaintiff’s property.
Interestingly, Midwest does not reference Cousins v McColl Frontenac Inc ("Cousins"), where the New Brunswick Court of Appeal previously affirmed the opposite – namely, that a reasonable award of damages is the loss in market value of the property.
How do plaintiffs reconcile these different approaches?
Click here to read the full article.