What are the arguments that challenge a motion judge's interpretation of a commercial agreement?

These arguments attack the motion judge's interpretation of commercial agreements, which is subject to a deferential standard of review absent extricable legal error: Sattva Capital v. Creston Moly, [2014] 2 S.C.R. 633, [2014] S.C.J. No. 53, 2014 SCC 53, at para. 55. No extricable legal error has been shown. They also attack the motion judge's findings of fact and mixed fact and law, which are also entitled to deference. I am not satisfied that any palpable and overriding error has been shown. The motion judge's reasons explain why he reached the conclusions that he did. I am not persuaded that any basis has been shown to justify appellate interference. Conclusion