The Respondent, Cold Lake First Nations (“CLFN”), brought an Application for Judicial Review of the Minister of Tourism, Parks and Recreation’s decision to engage in construction on some land that CLFN had ongoing rights to access for the purposes of exercising treaty fishing rights. The Appellant and Respondent entered into a Consent Order that dealt with the access rights to the land. When the Consent Order was breached by some members of CLFN, another Order was entered by Goss J. that also dealt with access to the land. When this Order was also breached by some members of CLFN, the Minister of Tourism, Parks and Recreation brought an Application to have CLFN as well as eight specific members of CLFN held in contempt of the Consent Order and the subsequent Order of Goss J.

The Chambers Judge dismissed the contempt Application and varied the Consent Order and subsequent Order of Goss J. The Minister of Tourism, Parks and Recreation Appealed the decision. One of the issues the Court of Appeal decided on was whether the Chambers Judge had the jurisdiction to vary the Consent Order and subsequent Order of Goss J. in the absence of an Application to vary by one of the Parties. The Court relied on Rules 6.3 and 6.11 for the requirements for Applications and supporting evidence. The Court stated:

Applications also need to be supported by properly filed evidence in order to be considered by the court on an application: Deiure v Deiure, 2000 ABCA 328, 281 A.R. 146 at para. 3. The court should not grant relief without evidence to support the order. The Rules set out the types of evidence that the court may consider when making a decision: r.6.11. They do not include unsworn statements made during a court application.

The Court held that the Chambers Judge did not have the jurisdiction to amend the Orders.