What is the standard of review for making conclusions of palpable and overriding error in the context of an allegation of sexual assault?

British Columbia, Canada


The following excerpt is from M.G. v. Director of Family and Child Services, 2007 BCSC 461 (CanLII):

To these comments, I add that the same standard of palpable and overriding error applies to inferences of fact (Housen v. Nikolaisen, [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235, 2002 SCC 33 at paras. 19-25), and to questions of mixed fact and law where the issue on appeal involves the trial judge’s interpretation of the evidence as a whole (Housen v. Nikolaisen, supra, at para. 36). I also agree with the Director’s submission that the appropriate standard of review will be correctness on a pure question of law: Housen v. Nikolaisen, supra, at paras. 8-9.

Other Questions


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 the purpose of determining whether a trial judge made a palpable and overriding error? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the standard of review for a claim of palpable and overriding error? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the standard of reasonableness in the context of an allegation of sexual assault? (Canada (Federal), Canada)
What is the standard of standard for correctness, correctness and no palpable or overriding error? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the standard of review for re-weighing evidence in a sexual assault case? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is a palpable error in the standard of review applicable to questions of mixed fact and law? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the test for determining that there was fraud or misrepresentation in the context of an allegation of sexual assault? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the professional standard of conduct of a Crown Prosecutor in the context of a sexual assault case? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
What is the standard of evidence in the context of sexual assault cases? (Ontario, Canada)