What is the effect of relitigation of the same facts before a different tribunal?
British Columbia, Canada
The following excerpt is from Strother (Re), 2012 LSBC 1 (CanLII):
It is evident from the reasoning in Toronto v. CUPE that the evil to be avoided is the relitigation of the same facts before a different tribunal. The possibility of inconsistent findings is to be avoided so that the credibility of the judicial process is not undermined.
"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 effect of a finding of fact by the BC Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal on a claimant’s entitlement? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the difference between the fact pattern at bar and fact pattern in law? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the effect of adverse effects discrimination on a disabled person? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the effect of a common law common law agreement where the parties have reached an agreement stating that if the parties reconcile, will the common law rule remain in effect even if they reconcile? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for judicial review of the findings of the Disability Review Officer's findings of fact, law or mixed fact and law? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the effect of "palpable and overriding error" in the findings of fact? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the effect of the Master's findings of fact on a mortgage application? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the effect of an injunction restraining the wife from selling, disposing of or voting her shares in a company to effect a sale or disposal of the assets of the company? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is patent unreasonableness the standard of review for findings of fact or law or exercise of discretion under the Administrative Tribunals Act? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is a finding of fact by a judge sitting alone a different standard of review than that by a jury? (British Columbia, Canada)
