The following excerpt is from International Union of Painters and Allied Trades, Local 200 v. S & S Glass and Aluminum (1993) Ltd., 2004 CanLII 12611 (ON CA):
As this court recently said, in Bottan v. Vroom, [2002] O.J. No. 1383 at para. 13, when reviewing a discretionary decision: Where a motions judge exercises discretion, an appellate court should intervene only where the discretion has been exercised on a wrong principle of law or a clear error has been made. It is not the role of an appellate court to replace the exercise of discretion by the motions judge. An appellate court should defer to the findings of fact made by a motions judge unless the motions judge disregarded or failed to appreciate relevant evidence.
"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.