A former student has sent me a rather extraordinary Ontario judgment, released last month, on whether expert testimony is admissible even if it relates to the law of the forum.

http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2011/2011onsc2178/2011onsc2178.html

“The evidence is opinion evidence derived from a law and economics analysis on the potential societal and economic impacts of waiver of tort if it is recognized and applied in a case such as this.”

The evidence was ruled admissible, partly because the many recent ‘waiver of tort’ cases in Ontario have said that the claims are novel and therefore policy considerations are important in relation to decisions whether or not to certify class actions.

A very interesting development with potentially far-reaching consequences ....

Lionel

====

This message was delivered through the Restitution Discussion Group,
an international internet LISTSERV devoted to all aspects of the law
of unjust enrichment. To subscribe, send "subscribe enrichment" in
the body of a message to <listserv@lists.mcgill.ca>. To unsubscribe,
send "signoff enrichment" to the same address. To make a posting to
all group members, send to <enrichment@lists.mcgill.ca>. The list is
run by Lionel Smith of McGill University, <lionel.smith@mcgill.ca>.