2012 SCC 32 is Clements v. Clements. The cases are listed chronologically below. The 19th, which isn’t included, is Clements. The search is limited to court cases. If you check for cases citing Clements through the citation tab on Clements, itself, you’ll get 20 hits. The 20th is a workers’ compensation tribunal decision.

I’ll try the search on one or the other of the commercial databases some other time.

Anybody notice a pattern?

Care to comment on the meaning of that pattern?

1.  Peso v. Hollaway, 2012 BCSC 1763 (CanLII) — 2012-11-26

Supreme Court of British Columbia — British Columbia

collision — surgery — pain — symptoms — work

[…] Clements v. Clements, 2012 SCC 32 (CanLII), 2012 SCC 32. […]

 

2.  Hunt v. Ugre, 2012 BCSC 1704 (CanLII) — 2012-11-19

Supreme Court of British Columbia — British Columbia

pain — symptoms — soft tissue injuries — disorder — psychiatric

[…] play, as long as the plaintiff establishes a substantial connection between the injuries and the defendant’s negligence beyond the “de minimus” range: Farrant v. Laktin, 2011 BCCA 336 (CanLII), 2011 BCCA 336 at paras. 9 and 11; Athey; Resurfice Corp v. Hanke, 2007 SCC 7 (CanLII), 2007 SCC 7; Clements v. Clements, 2012 SCC 32 (CanLII), 2012 SCC 32. […]

 

3.  McKerr v. CML Healthcare Inc., 2012 BCSC 1712 (CanLII) — 2012-11-15

Supreme Court of British Columbia — British Columbia

mammogram — breast cancer — hematoma — evidence — pain

[…] As recently articulated by the Supreme Court of Canada in Clements v. Clements, 2012 SCC 32 (CanLII), 2012 SCC 32, 346 D.L.R. (4th) 577 at para. 7, the court only “assigns liability when the plaintiff and the defendant are linked in a correlative relationship of doer and sufferer of the same harm. […]

 

4.  Clark v. Kouba, 2012 BCSC 1607 (CanLII) — 2012-10-31

Supreme Court of British Columbia — British Columbia

accident — pain — running — marathons — full-time work

[…] ] [60] The Supreme Court of Canada re-affirmed these principles in Clements v. Clements, 2012 SCC 32 (CanLII), 2012 SCC 32, 346 D.L.R. (4th) 577. […]

 

5.  Pardo v. Chen, 2012 BCSC 1525 (CanLII) — 2012-10-17

Supreme Court of British Columbia — British Columbia

mall — pain — vehicle in front — accident — part-time job

[…] [64] The Supreme Court of Canada recently discussed the applicable principles in Clements v. Clements, 2012 SCC 32 (CanLII), 2012 SCC 32. […]

 

6.  Smith v. Moshrefzadeh, 2012 BCSC 1458 (CanLII) — 2012-10-02

Supreme Court of British Columbia — British Columbia

prawn fishery — earning capacity — accident — non-pecuniary damages — headaches

[…] minimus range: Farrant v. Latkin 2011 BCCA 336 (CanLII), 2011 BCCA 336 (B.C.C.A), at paras 9 and 11; Athey v. Leonati, 1996 CanLII 183 (SCC), [1996] 3 S.C.R. 458; Blackwater v. Plint, 2005 SCC 58 (CanLII), 2005 SCC 58; Resurfice Corp. v. Hanke, 2007 SCC 7 (CanLII), 2007 SCC 7; Clements v. Clements, 2012 SCC 32 (CanLII), 2012 SCC 32. […]

 

7.  Pastore v. Aviva Canada Inc., 2012 ONCA 642 (CanLII) — 2012-09-27

Court of Appeal for Ontario — Ontario

delegate — catastrophic impairment — mental disorder — arbitrator — cl

[…] [3] The Supreme Court of Canada recently further explained Resurfice in Clements v. Clements, 2012 SCC 32 (CanLII), 2012 SCC 32. […]

 

8.  Mayervich v Sadeghipour, 2012 BCSC 1624 (CanLII) — 2012-09-21

Supreme Court of British Columbia — British Columbia

anti-depressant medication — bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome — accident — chronic pain — deviated septum

[…] its most recent revelation of the law in this area, the “but for” causation test must be applied in a robust common sense fashion, and it is an error to insist on scientific precision in the evidence as a condition of finding but for causation: Clements v. Clements, 2012 SCC 32 (CanLII), 2012 SCC 32 at paras. 10 and 49. […]

 

9.  Maya Naks v. Hesse, 2012 BCSC 1328 (CanLII) — 2012-09-11

Supreme Court of British Columbia — British Columbia

pain — accident — headaches — neck — non-pecuniary damages

[…] see Resurfice Corp. v. Hanke, 2007 SCC 7 (CanLII), [2007] 1 S.C.R. 333; Clements v Clements, 2012 SCC 32 (CanLII), 2012 SCC 32. […]

 

10.  Brandy Naks v. Hesse, 2012 BCSC 1327 (CanLII) — 2012-09-11

Supreme Court of British Columbia — British Columbia

non-pecuniary damages — pain — accident — neck — disc bulge

[…] : see Athey v. Leonati, 1996 CanLII 183 (SCC), [1996] 3 S.C.R. 458 and Clements v. Clements, 2012 SCC 32 (CanLII), 2012 SCC 32. […]

 

11.  McArthur v. Hudson, 2012 BCSC 1293 (CanLII) — 2012-08-31

Supreme Court of British Columbia — British Columbia

trochanteric bursitis — medical-legal report — hip pain — headaches — neck

[…] [8] Notwithstanding the recent review of the principles of causation by the Supreme Court of Canada in Clements v. Clements, 2012 SCC 32 (CanLII), 2012 SCC 32, the fundamental principles remain the same. […]

 

12.  Walsh v Mobil Oil Canada (Exxmobil Canada Ltd.), 2012 ABQB 527 (CanLII) — 2012-08-22

Court of Queen’s Bench — Alberta

retaliation — standard of review — salary group — damages — human

[…] ] [92] The Supreme Court at the end of June, 2012 released its decision in Clements v. Clements, 2012 SCC 32 (CanLII), 2012 SCC 32, which clarifies the law of causation and the respective roles of the “but for” and “material contribution” tests. […]

 

13.  Morgan v. Scott, 2012 BCSC 1237 (CanLII) — 2012-08-17

Supreme Court of British Columbia — British Columbia

non-pecuniary losses — chronic pain — lung — neck — non-pecuniary damages

[…] [39] I am satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that but for the Accident these various adverse changes in Mr. Morgan’s condition would not have occurred: Clements v. Clements, 2012 SCC 32 (CanLII), 2012 SCC 32 at para. 8. […]

 

14.  Dhaliwal v. Premier Fitness Clubs Inc., 2012 ONSC 4711 (CanLII) — 2012-08-15

Superior Court of Justice — Ontario

water fountain — fitness club — vertical leg press machine — shoes — finger

[…] [54] Recently, in Clements v. Clements, 2012 SCC 32 (CanLII), 2012 SCC 32, the Supreme Court of Canada helpfully restated the law in relation to causation in tort cases. […]

 

15.  Peragine v. Serena, 2012 BCSC 1218 (CanLII) — 2012-08-14

Supreme Court of British Columbia — British Columbia

knee — track — soccer — pain — traffic

[…] The “but for” test recognized that compensation for negligent conduct should only be made where a substantial connection between the injury and the defendant’s conduct is proven: Resurfice Corp. v. Hanke, 2007 SCC 7 (CanLII), [2007] 1 S.C.R. 333, at paras. 21-23; Clements v. Clements, 2012 SCC 32 (CanLII), 2012 SCC 32 at para. 21. […]

 

16.  Mandeville et al v. Manufacturers Life Insurance Company, 2012 ONSC 4316 (CanLII) — 2012-08-01

Superior Court of Justice — Ontario

participating policyholders — demutualize — actuary — duty of care — mutual

[…] See Clements v. Clements, 2012 SCC 32 (CanLII), 2012 SCC 32 at paras. 8 and 9 per McLachlin C.J. […]

 

17.  Olynyk v. Turner, 2012 BCSC 1138 (CanLII) — 2012-07-30

Supreme Court of British Columbia — British Columbia

pain — accident — pre-existing condition — landscaping — non-pecuniary damages

[…] of causation since Athey (in, for example, Resurfice Corp. v. Hanke, 2007 SCC 7 (CanLII), 2007 SCC 7, [2007] 1 S.C.R. 333, and most recently in Clements v. Clements, 2012 SCC 32 (CanLII), 2012 SCC 32), the propositions set out in Athey remain the law and are all the law that need be considered in the circumstances of this case. […]

 

18.  Densem v. Sidal, 2012 BCSC 1008 (CanLII) — 2012-07-09

Supreme Court of British Columbia — British Columbia

motor vehicle collision — injury — evidence — cognitive symptoms — velodrome

[…] [39] On June 29, 2012 the Supreme Court of Canada delivered its most recent decision on causation in Clements v. Clements, 2012 SCC 32 (CanLII), 2012 SCC 32. […]