Is the adjudicator’s assessment of credibility based on a flawed approach to assessing credibility?
British Columbia, Canada
The following excerpt is from Brigden v British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles), 2019 BCSC 418 (CanLII):
An adjudicator’s assessment of credibility is subject to review and a flawed approach to assessing credibility will provide sufficient grounds for the court to set aside the decision: Scott v. British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles), 2013 BCCA 554 at para. 37.
"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 test for credibility in a motor vehicle adjudicator's assessment of credibility? (British Columbia, Canada)
In assessing credibility, how do we assess credibility? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the impact of a review officer’s assessment of credibility in assessing credibility? (British Columbia, Canada)
Can an adjudicator resolve credibility disputes if the adjudicator's reasoning process is manifestly flawed? (British Columbia, Canada)
What factors must be considered when assessing credibility in a credibility assessment? (British Columbia, Canada)
Does the adjudicator's approach to the credibility assessment apply to a witness report? (British Columbia, Canada)
How have courts in BC considered credibility and the impact on medical evidence in assessing credibility and credibility? (British Columbia, Canada)
Can a flaw or flaws be seen in the reasons of an adjudicator? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the court’s approach to assessing credibility in cases where there are significantly different versions of the events? (British Columbia, Canada)
In what circumstances will a adjudicator's reasoning be manifestly flawed where the adjudicator failed to consider the evidence supporting the findings of two witnesses? (British Columbia, Canada)
