Some lawyers and judges have taken that to mean that $ 1 million is a
hard cap
on punitive damages in Canada, bolstered by former Supreme
Court Justice Ian Binnie's comments in his decision restoring the award in favour
of Will's client, in which he wrote: «An award
of $ 1 million in punitive damages is certainly at the upper
end of a sustainable award
on these facts.»
1) we agree to disagree:) 2) supremacy
of EU law for the EU system is the equivalent
of the
hard core
of constitutional values that some national
Courts defend against EU (and ECHR)- it is not a matter
of «legitimacy» or «patriotism» but
of using a «lower rank» instrument (accession treaty) to interfere with a treaty rule: the identical issue is for States who have a «rigid» constitution (alike the Treaty binds the CIEU): the accession treaty to ECHR or EU has a «lower rank» than the Constitution itself, so that the national Constitutional
Court can not accept it can derogate to a higher ranking rule - usually they will find a way to reconcile the «construction»
of the two set
of rules, but if they are requested
of an opinion
on the point
of principle, they will always say that in the very
end, if all other paths have been explored to avoid the conflict, eventually it is the Constitution and neither ECHR nor EUwhich prevails.