CCS CORPORATION v PEMBINA PIPELINE CORPORATION, 2017 ABCA 260
14.38: Court of Appeal panels
14.50: Time limits for oral argument
14.74: Application to dismiss an appeal
14.37: Single appeal judges
The Applicant, CCS Corporation, sought to appeal a Decision which summarily dismissed certain of its claims against the Respondent, Pembina. In the interim, the Applicant applied for summary determination of one of the issues raised on Appeal. The Application initially requested a determination by a single Judge of the Court. The Applicant subsequently acknowledged that the Application for summary determination was not “incidental to an appeal” and thus was outside the jurisdiction of a single Judge of the Court to hear, in accordance with R. 14.37(1). Slatter J.A. confirmed, referring to Rules 14.38(2)(a) and 14.74 that is well established that “any determination of the merits of an appeal must be made by a full 3 judge panel of the Court”.
The Applicant then applied to have the Application for summary determination adjourned to the full panel applications Court. Slatter J.A. dismissed both the adjournment Application and the underlying Application for summary determination of an issue on Appeal on the basis that “the full panel applications court is not logistically well equipped to deal with matters of this complexity” particularly given the time constraints on oral argument set out in Rule 14.50(a). Further, apart from the procedure set out in Rule 14.37, the Court has no established procedure for summary determination of Appeals. An Application for a summary determination of an issue would require a procedure equivalent to a full appeal hearing and a subsequent full appeal hearing may be additionally required to determine other issues in the Appeal.View CanLII Details