From Don's post.
Regulation defines the required landing distance as the actual landing distance divided by 0.6, assuming the surface is dry.
If the surface is wet, the required landing distance must be at least 115 % of that for a dry surface.
From Gnads post.
Dry runway unfactored
1264m
(1264/.6) x 1.15 = 2422m (Airbus method)
Toronto LDA 2743m
1264 x 1.82 = 2300m ( Australian method 1.67 +.15)
And the above figures are just for wet...not contaminated...at best the landing was so marginal as to be less than sensible but given it was contaminated rather than just wet I still believe the landing was probably illegal.
Edited because I remembered the wet figure rather than Gnads dry figure when I went to post with calc in hand.