Having regard for the foregoing, I think we should not interfere with the award made by the judge: see Woelk v. Halvorson, 1980 CanLII 17 (SCC), [1980] 2 S.C.R. 430, [1981] 1 W.W.R. 289 at 293, 14 C.C.L.T. 181, 114 D.L.R. (3d) 385, 3 N.R. 232, 24 A.R. 620, where McIntyre J., in giving the judgment for the court, said: It is well settled that a court of appeal should not alter a damage award made at trial merely because, on its view of the evidence, it would have come to a different conclusion. It is only where a court of appeal comes to the conclusion that there was no evidence upon which a trial judge could have reached this conclusion, or where he proceeded upon a mistaken or wrong principle, or where the result reached at the trial was wholly erroneous, that a court of appeal is entitled to intervene. IV. Damages for delayed payment
"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.