The respondent son sued his appellant father for specific performance of an alleged oral agreement for the sale of farm land.
The trial judge dismissed the action, finding that the acts of part performance were insufficient to displace the Statute of Frauds and that no oral agreement existed.
The Court of Appeal reversed this decision, substituting its own view of the facts.
The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal, holding that an appellate court cannot reverse a trial judge's findings of fact based on credibility unless there is a palpable and overriding error.
As the trial judge made no such error, the Court of Appeal erred in substituting its version of the facts.
