What are the principles to be applied in an application for reconsideration after judgment?

The principles to be applied in applications for reconsideration after judgment are well settled. The Applicants cited the summary of the principles to be applied as set out in United States of America v. Boyachek, 2013 BCSC 1560 per Griffin J. at para. 55 as follows:

In B.J.L. v. J.R.D.L., 2003 BCSC 381, Henderson J., after referring to Cheema v. Cheema, 2001 BCSC 298, summarized the law on reconsideration of a ruling after a hearing as follows at para. 3: 1. A trial judge has an “unfettered discretion” to reconsider an issue after pronouncement of judgment but before entry of the final order … 2. This power must be “exercised sparingly” to avoid fraud and abuse of process … 3. The underlying rationale for the unfettered discretion is to prevent a miscarriage of justice … 4. In general, reconsideration of an issue is not an alternative to an appeal. Reconsideration applications will not be entertained where they are motivated by tactical considerations, particularly where the argument advanced could have been advanced at trial … 5. The burden of persuasion rests with the applicant, who must show that a miscarriage of justice would probably occur unless the issue is reconsidered and decided in her favour … 6. An issue may be reconsidered where new, relevant evidence is adduced which was not available at the time of the original trial … 7. An issue may be reconsidered if the original judgment is in error because it overlooks material evidence … 8. An issue may be reconsidered if the original judgment is in error because it misconstrues material evidence … 9. An issue may be reconsidered if the original judgment is in error because it misapplies the law … 10. An issue may be reconsidered if the original judgment, although not in error on the day it was given, becomes erroneous because of a change in the law … 11. An issue may be reconsidered where there has been a change in circumstances between the date the judgment was pronounced and the time of the subsequent application, provided the change in circumstances relates to something fundamental to the original reasons for judgment … 12. An issue may be reconsidered where the original judgment was “so expressed as to lead to uncertainty and confusion" … [Citations omitted.]