The standard of review is whether the Master’s order can be said to be “clearly wrong”, unless the order is vital to a final issue in the case or is a decision on a point of law, in which case the review is by way of a rehearing, unfettered by any deference to the order under appeal: Stoneman v. Desjardins, 2004 BCSC 57 at para. 7.
"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.