With respect, I am unable to agree with the rejection of the trial judge’s conclusions concerning the letter. In my view, the trial judge was critical of the letter as much for what it failed to include as for what it did include. The finding by the trial judge that the letter was deceptive or misleading was a finding of fact, and as such entitled to deference, in the absence of a legal or palpable and overriding error: Housen v. Nikolaisen, 2002 SCC 33, [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235.
"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.