BAINS v ADAM, 2024 ABCA 327
STREKAF JA
3.74: Adding, removing or substituting parties after close of pleadings
14.5: Appeals only with permission
14.51: Applications without oral argument
14.57: Adding, removing or substituting parties to an appeal
Case Summary
This was an Appeal by Dr. Bains following a Trial Judge's dismissal of three Claims for damages resulting from motor vehicle accidents. Due to his designation under an Interim Court Access Restriction Order, Dr. Bains was required to seek permission to Appeal, pursuant to Rule 14.5. The Court of Appeal initially granted permission on limited grounds, including whether the Trial Judge erred in assessing damages, admitting certain medical evidence, and excluding specific medical records (Permission to Appeal Decision). Dr. Bains then filed additional Applications, pursuant to Rule 14.51, which were addressed in this Decision.
Dr. Bains requested that Justice Strekaf recuse herself, citing alleged bias. Strekaf J.A., applying the objective test for reasonable apprehension of bias, found no valid basis for recusal. Dr. Bains also requested a hearing before a three-judge panel to review portions of the Permission to Appeal Decision. However, Justice Strekaf noted that Rule 14.5(3) prohibits Appeals from Decisions on permission to Appeal by a single judge, and the Application was denied on that basis.
In another Application, Dr. Bains sought to amend his claim by adding Parties. Strekaf J.A. held that amending the Statement of Claim to add Defendants should have been done at the Court of King’s Bench level. Adding Parties as this stage in the Appeal would result in prejudice to the Respondents. The Court noted that, pursuant to Rules 14.57 and 3.74, it would be improper to add a Party to an Appeal if it would result in prejudice that cannot be compensated in costs. Dr. Bains’ request to amend the Claim was denied. In addition, his request to amend a previous Order’s wording was denied, as the existing Order accurately reflected the Trial Court’s Decision.
Lastly, Dr. Bains sought to halt all Appeal proceedings until certain issues were resolved, including adding Defendants and revisiting Witness Subpoenas. Justice Strekaf denied this request, finding it moot, as all issues had been addressed within this Decision. In conclusion all Applications were denied.
View CanLII Details