What is the impact of a relaxation of the approach to causation in Canadian tort law?

Mr. Justice Linden goes on to explain the relaxation of the approach to causation in Canadian tort law represented by Mr. Justice Sopinka's decision in Snell v. Farrell. He writes at p.108: In other words "it is not essential to have a positive medical opinion to support a finding of causation" [Snell at p.306]. Mr. Justice Sopinka indicated that, if necessary, he would open up the causation proof issue even further if he "were convinced that defendants who have a substantial connection to the injury were escaping liability because plaintiffs cannot prove causation under currently applied principles..." [Snell at p.299]. Hence, it is now open for trial judges to infer causation when there are facts proved that would fairly lead to an inference on the basis of common sense, without the necessity of strict scientific proof, even in medical cases.