Collins v Tabart

The appeal in *Collins v Tabart* concerned an application to interfere with a trial judge's findings of fact, particularly those based on the credibility of witnesses, and whether the trial judge erred in resolving conflicts in the evidence. The appeal also addressed the inconsistency of the plaintiff's evidence with objectively established facts.

The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the trial judge had made an error in their assessment of the evidence, specifically concerning the credibility of witnesses and the resolution of conflicting accounts. This involved scrutinising whether the trial judge's findings were demonstrably wrong or against the weight of the evidence, particularly where the plaintiff's evidence appeared inconsistent with objectively established facts.

The Court of Appeal affirmed the principles governing appeals from findings of fact, emphasising that appellate courts are reluctant to overturn a trial judge's findings, especially where those findings depend on the assessment of witness credibility. The court found no error in the trial judge's approach to resolving the conflicting evidence and concluded that the plaintiff's evidence was not so inconsistent with objectively established facts as to warrant interference.

The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to pay the costs of the appeal.