Case Law

The Andrews Trilogy: Canada's Cap on Pain and Suffering Damages

Why are pain and suffering awards in Canada lower than in the United States? It goes back to three Supreme Court decisions from 1978.

A judge's gavel and sound block

In 1978, the Supreme Court of Canada decided three personal injury cases together: Andrews v. Grand & Toy Alberta Ltd., Thornton v. School District No. 57 and Arnold v. Teno. They are known as the Andrews trilogy.

The short answer

The trilogy capped damages for pain, suffering and loss of enjoyment of life (non-pecuniary damages) at $100,000 in 1978 dollars, adjusted for inflation since. Losses like care costs and lost income are compensated in full.

What happened

A law book beside the scales of justice on a wooden desk

In Andrews, a 21-year-old was left quadriplegic after a traffic collision. The court had to decide how to compensate him for future care, lost earnings and his pain and suffering.

What the court decided

  • Full compensation for financial losses: future care costs, including home care rather than an institution where reasonable, and lost earnings.
  • A cap on non-pecuniary damages: $100,000 for the most catastrophic injuries, to keep awards predictable and avoid ever-higher amounts.

The cap today

The cap is adjusted for inflation, so today's figure is much higher than $100,000. It applies to the most serious cases. Most injuries are worth far less.

What it doesn't cap

  • Lost income and loss of earning capacity.
  • Future care, medical and rehabilitation costs.
  • Other out-of-pocket expenses.

What it means for you

For a personal injury claim, careful evidence of financial losses often matters more than the pain and suffering figure. In Ontario motor vehicle cases, special statutory rules, such as deductibles and thresholds, also apply.

Talk to NEO

Wondering how a decision like this applies to your situation? NEO can review your facts and explain your options. Call 647-200-3526 or toll-free 888-519-2435, email info@neolegalservices.com, or book a free consultation.

Sources

Read next: Childs v. Desormeaux and Stewart v. Pettie: Are Party Hosts Liable?

General Ontario legal information, not legal advice for your matter, and reading it does not create a retainer. Sources checked 15 October 2026: check the current law, forms and dates before you act.

Photos from Pexels: A judge's gavel and sound block · A law book beside the scales of justice on a wooden desk.

This article is general information for people in Ontario, not legal advice. Rules, forms and deadlines change, and every situation is different. Check the current rule or speak to a licensed legal professional before you act.

Not sure where you stand? A licensed paralegal can look at your documents and tell you your options.

Book a Free Consultation

Loading comments…

Law Society of Ontario — Barreau de l'Ontario
Find it on Apple NewsView full feature on Apple News