The Appellants appealed a Decision of an Applications Judge on its merits and the Costs Award, and both the Appellants and Respondent introduced new evidence. When new evidence is introduced on Appeal from an Applications Judge’s Decision, a fresh assessment of the facts is required, and no deference is owed to the Applications Judge’s findings. Rule 6.14(3) allows for the introduction of new evidence as long as the Justice hearing the Appeal determines that the evidence is relevant and material. The test to introduce new evidence is “very lax”.

Justice Mandziuk considered a procedural issue in this Decision. Rule 6.14(2) prescribes that an Appellant has 10 days after being served with a filed Order by an Applications Judge to file and serve its Notice of Appeal. The Appellants filed their Notice to Appeal of the merits Decision in time, but did not amend their Notice of Appeal, or file a new one, in response to the Costs Award, which was rendered by the Applications Judge at a later time.

While the Rules for Appeals to the Court of Appeal are not directly applicable to Appeals of an Applications Judge’s Order, they are instructive. Rule 14.9 states that while a separate Notice of Appeal is required for each Decision appealed, Appeals concerning a substantive Decision and a ruling on Costs for the same hearing are an exception. Justice Mandziuk read Rule 14.9 in conjunction with Rule 1.2 (which provides for a fair, just, and cost-effective and timely Court process) to decide that he had authority to hear the Appeal of the Costs Award notwithstanding that no amended Notice of Appeal was filed for it.