JPEG vs. RAW is a well-documented debate. Dave summarises it nicely.
My camera takes great JPEGs with little need for post-processing - much less than RAW, so I shoot mostly JPEG these days to save on time and space.
More important stuff will be shot RAW, but at around 90Mb per file once it's processed to a 16-bit TIFF...
In tricky lighting conditions then RAW gives you more power to rescue over or underexposures. There's simply more data to play with. For everyday shooting though, JPEG is fine for my requirements.
Thanks, all!