Whether the trial judge identified the correct legal test to determine the meaning of the railway purposes condition is a question of law reviewable on a standard of correctness. The judge’s application of the test to the appellant’s claim that the lands were no longer required for railway purposes is a question of mixed fact and law and is reviewable on the standard of palpable and overriding error, absent an extricable error of law: Hwlitsum First Nation v. Canada (Attorney General), 2018 BCCA 276 at para. 13, citing Housen v. Nikolaisen, 2002 SCC 33.
"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.