What is the test for reversing a finding of fact?

Findings of fact made by a trial judge are entitled to deference. Though this is a general principle, it is stated most strongly where the findings of fact are based on credibility. The findings of fact of a trial judge are not to be reversed unless it can be established that the trial judge made some palpable and overriding error which affected his assessment of the facts. (See Stein v. The Ship “Kathy K”, 1975 CanLII 146 (SCC), [1976] 2 S.C.R. 802) A palpable and overriding error may exist where : 1. there is no evidence to support the decision of the trial judge, or 2. he or she considered irrelevant factors, or 3. he or she failed to consider relevant factors, or 4. where there is an award of damages, if the award is inordinately high or low.

All parties agree that the applicable law regarding conflict of interest is that stated by Sopinka J. in MacDonald Estate v. Martin, 1990 CanLII 32 (SCC), [1990] 3 S.C.R. 1235. This was recognized by the chambers judge in his decision. In this case, however, the chambers judge found it necessary to deal with only the first of the two questions which Sopinka J. posed to determine issues of conflict of interest regarding solicitors. That is: Did the lawyer receive confidential information attributable to a solicitor-and -client relationship relevant to the matter at hand?