c ott ▁could ▁have ▁mit ig ated ▁its ▁losses , ▁ ▁however , ▁South c ott ▁failed ▁to ▁make ▁out ▁a ▁case ▁for ▁either ▁specific ▁performance ▁or ▁dam ages . ▁ ▁As ▁a ▁result , ▁nom inal ▁dam ages ▁were ▁awarded ▁in ▁the ▁amount ▁of ▁$ 1 . ▁ ▁Le ave ▁to ▁appeal ▁and ▁cross - appe al ▁the ▁decision ▁were ▁granted ▁by ▁the ▁Supreme ▁Court ▁of ▁Canada ▁in ▁November ▁ 2 0 1 1 : ▁▁ ▁South c ott , ▁while ▁not ▁appe aling ▁the ▁trial ▁judge ’ s ▁ref us al ▁to ▁award ▁specific ▁performance , ▁maintained ▁its ▁losses ▁were ▁not ▁avoid able . ▁ ▁On ▁cross - appe al , ▁the ▁Board ▁question ed ▁whether ▁the ▁Court ▁of ▁App e al ▁was ▁correct ▁in ▁law ▁in ▁dismiss ing ▁its ▁argument ▁rel ating ▁to ▁caus ation . ▁ ▁At ▁the ▁Supreme ▁Court ▁In ▁a ▁ 6 - 1 ▁r uling , ▁the ▁appeal ▁was ▁dismiss ed ▁with ▁costs . ▁As ▁it ▁was ▁therefore ▁unnecessary ▁to ▁consider ▁the ▁cross - appe al , ▁it ▁was ▁dismiss ed ▁without ▁costs . ▁ ▁Major ity ▁opinion ▁Kar ak ats an is ▁J ▁began ▁by ▁summar izing ▁the ▁principles ▁for ▁mit ig ation ▁previously ▁adopted ▁by ▁the ▁Court ▁in ▁As am era ▁O il ▁Corporation ▁Ltd . ▁v . ▁Sea ▁O il ▁& ▁General ▁Corporation ▁where ▁Lord ▁H ald ane ' s ▁observation ▁was ▁end ors ed : ▁ ▁The ▁principles ▁have ▁since ▁been ▁ref ined ▁in ▁further ▁cases ▁at ▁the ▁Court , ▁as ▁well