LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE — Exercise of Discretion — Challenge to — Whether Raises Mixed Law and Fact
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
A challenge to the exercise of judicial discretion necessarily raises issues of mixed law and fact because the appellate court must look at the surrounding circumstances to determine whether the lower court exercised discretion judiciously or arbitrarily.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
"A discretion is exercised by a Court in the context of certain circumstances placed before that Court. If the exercise of that discretion is challenged before an appellate Court, that Court, in my view, is bound to look at the surrounding circumstances to determine whether the lower Court exercised the discretion judiciously or judicially or arbitrarily. That is why I am of the view that such questions necessarily raise issues of mixed law and fact."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
A challenge to the exercise of judicial discretion raises mixed law and fact. The appellate court must examine the surrounding circumstances to assess whether the lower court acted judiciously, judicially, or arbitrarily. This involves both factual review (what circumstances existed) and legal review (whether the discretion was properly exercised). Therefore, leave to appeal is required for such challenges. The principle prevents appeals as of right on discretionary decisions. The appellate court will not interfere unless the discretion was exercised manifestly wrong or arbitrarily. The classification respects the wide latitude given to trial courts in discretionary matters. The appellant must show error of principle, not mere disagreement.
