What is the standard of review of a motion where it is alleged the arbitrator erred respecting any inferences of fact drawn?

The more onerous “palpable and overriding error” standard of review applies where it is alleged the arbitrator erred respecting any inferences of fact drawn, too. An appellate court must not second-guess the weight to be assigned to different pieces of the evidence. An appellate court should not interfere with a conclusion with which it disagrees, where that disagreement stems from a disagreement over the weight to be assigned to the underlying facts. “If there is no palpable and overriding error with respect to the underlying facts that the [adjudicator] relies on to draw the inference, then it is only where the inference drawing process itself is palpably in error that an appellate court can interfere with the factual conclusion”. See Housen v. Nikolaisen ¶ 23.