What is the test for a judicial review of a finding of fact, law or mixed fact?
British Columbia, Canada
The following excerpt is from Holewell v Lally, 2019 BCSC 1567 (CanLII):
Accordingly, for those grounds of judicial review which relate to the [dispute resolution officer’s] findings of fact, law, or mixed fact and law, the petitioner bears the onus of showing that those findings are patently unreasonable: Manz v. British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal), 2009 BCCA 92.
"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
What is the test for judicial review of the findings of the Disability Review Officer's findings of fact, law or mixed fact and law? (British Columbia, Canada)
How have courts interpreted Bolster Review Review Review for mixed fact and law? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the judicial review approach used by a court engaged in judicial review? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the standard of review for appellate review in cases involving mixed fact and law? (British Columbia, Canada)
What are the standards of review applicable to a judicial review of a decision made under the Rules of Review Act? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the standard of review of a finding of fact and his application of those facts? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the standard of review for an application for judicial review of a statutory tribunal? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the appropriate standard of review for an application for judicial review of patent unreasonableness? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the standard of review for a trial judge’s findings of fact? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the effect of a finding of no misconduct in a professional conduct review panel finding no misconduct? (British Columbia, Canada)
