What is the standard of review for the purpose of determining whether a trial judge made a palpable and overriding error?
Alberta, Canada
The following excerpt is from Seidel v. Kerr, 2003 ABCA 267 (CanLII):
The parties agree that the standard of review on questions of law is one of correctness. On questions of fact, the standard is whether the trial judge made a palpable and overriding error: Housen v. Nikolaisen, 2002 SCC 33 (CanLII).
"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 appropriate standard of review for the purpose of determining whether a claim has been successful at the Court of Appeal? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the legal test for determining whether a question of mixed fact and law is correct or palpable and overriding error? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the standard of review applicable to a trial judge in a negligence case? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the standard for review of a decision of the trial judge? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the standard of review of a learned trial judge’s decision? (Alberta, Canada)
Is it necessary for the trial judge to determine whether this residence was unfit for habitation? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the standard of review applied by the reviewing judge in an administrative law case? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the standard of review for an appellate court reviewing a trial decision? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the standard of palpable and overriding error on a contract? (Alberta, Canada)
Can a finding of fact be reviewed for palpable and overriding error? (Alberta, Canada)
