Sentences with phrase «overriding error of fact»

The respondent failed to identify any error of law or palpable and overriding error of fact by the motion judge.

The Court of Appeal held that the motion judge's decision was entitled to deference and should not be interfered with absent an error in law or principal, a palpable and overriding error of fact, or unless the decision is so clearly wrong as to amount to an injustice.

Although Shtaif broadly submitted the trial judge erred in finding him liable, he did not point to any palpable and overriding error of fact in the trial judge's deceit findings.

With respect to the «adult industry» stream, the Court of Appeal found no palpable and overriding error of fact or an extricable error of law in the Trial Judge's reasons: «In our view, there was evidence in the record to support the trial judge's findings and we see no basis upon which this court should interfere with respect to the adult stream.»

The Court of Appeal found that trial judge made palpable and overriding errors of fact and an extricable error in law that justified intervention vis - a-vis the above - noted agreement.

The trial judge gave a considered, detailed and context - sensitive explanation about how he arrived at his interpretation of this clause and his analysis is not marked by a rare extricable error of law or palpable and overriding errors of facts.

Not exact matches

Where there is no extricable error in principle, findings of mixed fact and law, should not be overturned, absent palpable and overriding error, Housen v. Nikolaisen, 2002 SCC 33 (CanLII), 2002 SCC 33, [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235, at para. 36.

A panel reviewing a decision of a single judge under s. 680 (1) is to be guided by three principles: absent palpable and overriding error, the review panel must show deference to the judge's findings of fact; the review panel may intervene and substitute its decision for that of the judge where it is satisfied the judge erred in law or in principle, and the error was material to the outcome; in the absence of legal error, the review panel may intervene and substitute its decision for that of the judge where it concludes the decision was clearly unwarranted.

An appellate court may not interfere with the findings and inferences of fact by a trial judge absent palpable and overriding error (see Housen v. Nikolaisen, 2002 SCC 33 (S.C.C.) at para. 10).

However, if the legal principle is not readily extricable from the findings or inferences of fact, then the judge's conclusions should not be overturned absent palpable and overriding error (Housen at paras. 26 - 36).

It did so primarily based on findings of fact by the trial judge which the court found were not subject to any palpable and overriding error.

Standard of review: correctness, questions of law; palpable and overriding error, findings of fact and inferences of fact.

«The standard of review on questions of fact is palpable and overriding error.

Related Terms: Question of Law, Question of Mixed Law and Fact, Standard of Review, Question of Discretion, Palpable Error, Overriding Error, Ad Quaestionem Facti Non Respondent Judices, Ad Quaestionem Juris Non Respondent Juratores

As of 2011, one jurisdiction has set the standard of review for questions of fact at palpable and overriding error:

The Court of Appeal allows the appeal, finding the Application Judge made a palpable and overriding error of mixed fact and law in finding the Respondent revoked its waiver.

Absent palpable and overriding error, it is common ground that an appellate court may not interfere with a trial judge's findings of fact.

The Supreme Court of Canada declined to interfere with the application judge's findings of fact, noting that «The standard of review for findings of fact — whether adjudicative, social, or legislative — remains palpable and overriding error.»

Applying McKinley, the question of whether the misconduct provided just cause for dismissal is a question of mixed fact and law, subject to a standard of review of palpable and overriding error.

This Court can reverse the Federal Court's fact - based discretion only upon demonstration of palpable and overriding error or failure to give weight to all relevant considerations: H.L. v. Canada (Attorney General), 2005 SCC 25, [2005] 1 S.C.R. 401; MiningWatch Canada v. Canada (Fisheries and Oceans), 2010 SCC 2, [2010] 1 S.C.R. 6 at paragraph 43; Community Panel of the Adams Lake Indian Band v. Adams Lake Band, 2011 FCA 37 at paragraph 31.

Inferences drawn from the facts also can not be overturned in the absence of a palpable and overriding error, and a finding of negligence can not be overturned in the absence of a palpable and overriding error.

Where there is no extricable error in principle, findings of mixed fact and law should not be overturned absent palpable and overriding error: Housen v. Nikolaisen, 2002 SCC 33 (CanLII), [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235, at para. 36.

The palpable and overriding error of mixed fax and law was that the application judge erred in finding that the waiver had been revoked when in fact it had not been properly revoked by reasonable notice.

committed a palpable and overriding error in inferring, without evidence, that Jazz had sufficient material facts about Al Boom's business and financial position to decline the risk Al Boom would experience past and future income losses caused by a breach of contract and such losses would not be too remote; and

Standard of review: correctness for questions of law; palpable and overriding error for findings of fact and inferences of fact.

He said at para. 31: «The evidence demonstrated it is more likely than not that even if the appellant had lived up to the standard of care, the respondent would have lost her leg» and at para. 36: «In view of the evidence I have reviewed, and in view of the respondent's concession that there was no evidence to suggest that it was more than likely a better outcome would have followed had the appellant acted with care, the trial judge's finding reveals either a misapprehension as to the law or a palpable and overriding error on the facts.»

The British Columbia Court of Appeal held there were a number of palpable and overriding errors in the trial judge's findings of fact, and concluded the parents did not know the grandfather was a pedophile.

Similarly, the Court found no palpable or overriding error in any of the judge's other findings of fact, and noted that the Appellant did not dispute that she originally moved to Canada on a temporary basis.

The FCA held that the Federal Court's finding that these facts were relevant was a question of mixed fact and law and the Minister had not demonstrated palpable and overriding error by the Federal Court judge.

A chambers judge's assessment of the facts based on the record before the chambers judge, the application of the law to those facts and the ultimate determination of whether summary judgment is appropriate are all reviewed for palpable and overriding error: Amack v Wishewan, 2015 ABCA 147 (CanLII) at para 27, 602 AR 62.

The standard of review for findings of mixed law and fact is highly deferential, requiring a palpable and overriding error before an appellate court will intervene.

In sum, on the record before us, including the presumed facts as adopted by the chambers judge, our view is that it was a palpable and overriding error for the chambers judge to conclude that the allegation of fraud «was rooted only in speculation and conjecture with a mild dose of melodrama thrown in».

These authorities are not to be taken as meaning that the findings of fact made at trial are immutable, but rather that they are not to be reversed unless it can be established that the learned trial judge made some palpable and overriding error which affected his assessment of the facts.

Questions of fact are subject to the standard of palpable and overriding error.

«I appreciate,» wrote Justice Epstein, «that the trial judge's findings of fact attract considerable deference and ought not to be interfered with absent palpable and overriding error.»