I am not satisfied that the adjudicator made a significant error of law or fact. Trial judges are owed deference on findings of mixed fact and law, absent an overriding and palpable error: Housen v. Nikolaisen, [2002] 2 S.C.R. 231. The same principle could be applied on a reconsideration of the decision of an adjudicator. In this matter, there was evidence upon which the adjudicator could conclude that the services were rendered, to the extent claimed, in exchange for a promise of payment. Accordingly, I would not grant the request for reconsideration on this ground. Did the adjudicator err in allowing payment for overnight supervision?
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.