Is a judge's failure to consider relevant evidence relevant to the issue of inter vivos gifts an error of law?
British Columbia, Canada
The following excerpt is from Killam v. Killam, 2018 BCCA 64 (CanLII):
Failure to consider relevant evidence may be an error of law, subject to the correctness standard of review on appeal: see e.g., Van de Perre v. Edwards, 2001 SCC 60 at para. 15. The appellant submits the judge’s failure to consider the conflicting evidence surrounding the disputed inter vivos gifts is subject to the correctness standard of review.
"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.
Other Questions
Is a trial judge's failure to give reasons sufficient to determine that the trial judge erred in appreciation of a relevant issue or application of the evidence? (British Columbia, Canada)
When a trial judge fails to mention a relevant factor in the trial, does that mean that the relevant factor has not been considered? (British Columbia, Canada)
What are the reasons for a finding that a trial judge erred in his or her appreciation of a relevant issue or of evidence? (British Columbia, Canada)
In what circumstances will a judge admit evidence that challenges the validity of a will or the settling of an inter vivos trust? (British Columbia, Canada)
Does the Court of Appeal judge have any error or error in giving undue weight to a video evidence? (British Columbia, Canada)
Does a trial judge have to consider the evidence that supports a finding of criminal negligence in a dangerous driving case? (British Columbia, Canada)
In what circumstances will the court consider relevancy of the relevant questions in a case? (British Columbia, Canada)
In the absence of evidence or material addressing matters so relevant to the issue before council, is it possible to say that a decision made by the City Council was not based upon or activated by an improper or incorrect assumption? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the impact of the respondent’s position that the adjudicator must consider all the relevant evidence before making a credibility finding? (British Columbia, Canada)
What are the relevant factors for determining whether either of two possible jurisdictions would be suitable for the determination of issues raised by the litigation at issue? (British Columbia, Canada)
