What is the proper legal test for setting aside an election?

The parties agreed that the proper approach to addressing the issue of whether an election should be set aside is that set out in Kent, J.’s decision in Vogel v. Brazeau (Municipal District No. 77), supra. ...Thus, when an application is brought to declare an election invalid, the questions which in my view should be asked are: 1. Has there been a contravention as set out in s. 137(2) of the Act? 2. If the answer is yes, then the judge may declare the election invalid. This may happen if the breach is blatant, intentional and an obvious and overriding subversion of the election process. 3. However, if the answer to #1 is yes, the judge may move to s. 137(3) and ask first whether the requirement which was breached was directory or mandatory. If it is directory, that is the end of the issue since it means the election was conducted substantially in accordance with the Act and the election is valid. 4. If the requirement is found to be mandatory, it seems to me that it is still open for the judge to ask whether the breach resulted in substantial non-compliance with the Act. For example, there may be a minor breach of a mandatory requirement. It is more likely however, that if the requirement was mandatory, the court will find that there has been substantial non-compliance with the Act. 5. If that finding is made, then the judge must ask whether the breach materially affected the result of the election. 6. Once the judge moves to s. 137(3), the onus is on the Respondent.