We see no material difference between the way in which the application judge articulated the test and the test as set out in such cases as Thompson v. Thompson, 1994 CanLII 26 (SCC), [1994] 3 S.C.R. 551. The threshold is very high. It was open to the application judge to conclude on the record, as he did, that the test had not been met.
"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.