What is the test for a "de novo" review of a decision of the Chief Commissioner of Human Rights?

22. On the one hand, there is a series of decisions, commencing with Sleeva v. Penguin Holidays Ltd. S.H.R.T. July 10, 2002 [reported 2002 CanLII 62876 (SK HRT), 47 C.H.R.R. D/314], in which the "review" contemplated by Section 29.4(4) was held to be a "de novo" determination or re-examination of the decision of the Chief Commissioner.

23. On the other hand, there is a series of decisions, commencing with Criss v. Government of Saskatchewan, Department of Justice, S.H.R.T. July 30, 2003 [reported 2003 CanLII 74513 (SK HRT), 48 C.H.R.R. D/491] in which it was held that the applicable test to be applied by the tribunal in conducting a review should be the "reasonableness simpliciter" test, a test or standard somewhere between "patently unreasonable" and "correctness", best expressed by, and close to, the "clearly wrong" test.