What is the test for a judge to be "conferred" by statute?

Having said this, however, it is also clear that a judge does not have an unfettered discretion to simply decide the case on the facts and his or her individual consideration of what a just outcome should be. The judge, in exercising his or her discretion, must apply the applicable principles of law set out in the statute and apply those principles to the facts in a manner consistent with the purpose of the statute. This was made clear in Gosse v. Sorensen-Gosse, 2011 NLCA 58, 311 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 76, wherein Wells J.A., for the court, stated (at para. 19): …. While courts and judges tend to speak in terms of discretion being “conferred” by statute, in all but exceptional cases the discretion is not so much conferred upon courts as it is entrusted to courts to give effect to the purposes of the statute, as explicitly stated in, or reasonably to be inferred from, its provisions. Therefore, the reasoning on which its exercise is based cannot be informed by the evidence alone. It must be consistent with furtherance of the statutory purpose. ….