Standard of review

• Author: Stephen Grant
• Pages: 245-245

245

gPart Six g

STANDARD OF REVIEW

I

refuse to be cynical and I’m sure it’s just me, but I nd the con-

cept of standard of review beyond perplexing. Indeed, there must be a

“better way,” as the Toronto Transit Commission describes its service.

It always seems like ex post facto reasoning to me. Correctness? Rea-

sonableness? Discretion? It depends. Deference to be aorded a statu-

tory tribunal and/or a trial judge? Sure, except when it isn’t. To me, it’s

illusory. In this chapter we have two looks at the problem: one from a

ne and vastly experienced former trial and now appellate judge and the

other from an amusing and insightful civil practitioner trying to decon-

struct the most recent utterance on this subject from the Supreme Court

of Canada.