What are the findings of the trial judge's findings of fact and law in a motor vehicle accident case?

The weight of the cross-appellants' memorandum of fact and law was devoted to disputing the trial judge's view of the facts. But they have not been able to show that "the learned trial Judge made some palpable and overriding error which affected his assessment of the facts": Stein v. The "Kathy K" (1975), 1975 CanLII 146 (SCC), 62 D.L.R. (3d) 1 at p. 5, [1976] 2 S.C.R. 802, 6 N.R. 359. On the factual side, apart from the minor error I have noted in a footnote above, the trial judge's findings of fact were richly supported by the evidence, and therefore unassailable in this court on the basis that the trial judge erred in finding that the adoption of safety measures would have forestalled the collision.