The appellant asserts that the trial judge erred in finding as a fact that she had constructive knowledge of the amended pet bylaw. In order to succeed on this ground, the appellant must show that the trial judge committed a palpable and overriding error in making this finding, which led him to a wrong result. See Housen v. Nikolaisen 2002 SCC 33 (CanLII), [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235, at paras. 1 and 4; H.L. v. Canada [2005} 2005 SCC 25 (CanLII), 1 S.C.R. 401, at para. 4.
"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.