What is the standard of deference the court owes to a motion judge in reviewing an order of support?
Manitoba, Canada
The following excerpt is from Senek v. Senek, 2014 MBCA 67 (CanLII):
Counsel are, of course, familiar with the high standard of deference this court owes when reviewing orders of support. Deference is owed to the motion judge’s decision absent an error in principle, a significant misapprehension of the evidence or unless the award is clearly wrong. See Hickey v. Hickey, 1999 CanLII 691 (SCC), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 518.
"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 of a motion judge's decision not to interfere with the decision of the motion judge? (Manitoba, Canada)
What is the test for deferential approach by an appellate court in reviewing a family law support order? (Manitoba, Canada)
What is the current state of the law on a motion to review a previous support order? (Manitoba, Canada)
What is the test for appellate interference in a motion judge's order setting out child support payments? (Manitoba, Canada)
What is the proper standard of review in the context of a motion for judicial review? (Manitoba, Canada)
What is the standard of review for appeals from support orders? (Manitoba, Canada)
What is the authority of the trial judge to order a retroactive order from the interim judge? (Manitoba, Canada)
When will the court order child support for the children of a separated parent from the date of the separation date? (Manitoba, Canada)
What is the standard of review for a trial judge's findings of fact and any inferences drawn? (Manitoba, Canada)
What is the standard of review for a trial judge's findings of fact and the inferences drawn by her? (Manitoba, Canada)
