What is the standard of review for findings of fact in a medical malpractice case?
Yukon, Canada
The following excerpt is from Murphy v. Szulinszky, 2016 YKCA 16 (CanLII):
The standard of review with respect to findings of fact is that of palpable and overriding error. A palpable and overriding error is an error so obvious that it can be plainly seen: Housen v. Nikolaisen, 2002 SCC 33 (CanLII).
I am unable to find any error of law in the judge’s legal analysis. With respect to the doctrine of unjust enrichment, he relied on Kerr v. Baranow, 2011 SCC 10, the leading authority on the issue. He did not misstate any of the principles set out in that case.
"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 standard of review for an appellate court reviewing an exercise of exercise of authority? (Yukon, Canada)
What is the standard of review for a finding of mixed fact and law? (Yukon, Canada)
What is the standard for establishing a prima facie case in negligence when a passenger is injured on a bus? (Yukon, Canada)
What is the applicable standard of review for an appeal from a discretionary order? (Yukon, Canada)
What is the standard of review on an appeal on a question of law? (Yukon, Canada)
What is the standard of review under the Privative Clause? (Yukon, Canada)
What is the effect of a finding in a sexual assault and battery case? (Yukon, Canada)
What is the standard of care established by law? (Yukon, Canada)
How has the court considered the potential prejudicial effect of excluding or excluding evidence of abuse in a sexual assault case? (Yukon, Canada)
How has custody of a child been determined in a separation case? (Yukon, Canada)
