What is the standard of review for an appeal against a Deputy Judge making errors of fact?
Ontario, Canada
The following excerpt is from Mohammed v. Ralota Technologies Inc., 2018 ONSC 3362 (CanLII):
The appellant argues that the Deputy Judge made errors of fact. No errors of law are alleged. This court has jurisdiction to hear the appeal. The standard of review is set out in Housen v. Nikolaisen, 2002 SCC 33 (CanLII), [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235. Dealing with alleged errors of fact, the standard is palpable and overriding error.
"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.
Other Questions
What is the standard of review for appeal from a judge on questions of law and mixed fact and law? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the standard of review applied to a judge's findings of fact and mixed fact and law? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the standard of review for a motion to appeal against a finding by a judge at the Court of Appeal? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the legal test for applying palpable and overriding error standard in appellate review of findings of fact and of mixed fact and law? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the standard of review for a motion of appeal against a finding of fact made by the trial judge? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the standard of review of a trial judge’s findings of fact? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the standard of review for an appeal from a decision of a judge? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the standard of review for an Assessment Officer to be reviewed by the Court of Appeal? (Ontario, Canada)
When a judge has made an error in principle by failing to consider the relevant elements of a legal test or standard, or has erred in the application or standard? (Ontario, Canada)
What is a palpable error in the standard of review applicable to questions of mixed fact and law? (Ontario, Canada)
