The Applicant sought an extension of time to appeal certain Judgments and Orders. Berger J.A. noted that in the circumstances, Rule 14.8(2)(iii) applied, such that a Notice of Appeal must be filed and served within one month after the date of a decision. Justice Berger then noted that the factors set out in Cairns v Cairns, 1931 CanLII 471 (AB CA) (“Cairns”) guide the Court’s discretion in such cases.

The Court had considered the factors in Cairns, and the Applicant failed to meet four of the factors. As such, Justice Berger did not grant the Application for an extension of time to appeal.

The Applicant also sought a Stay of a separate Order, pending its Appeal. The Respondent resisted the Stay, arguing that the Appeal had no merit and should be dismissed pursuant to Rule 14.73(d).

Berger J.A. reviewed the transcript of the lower Court proceedings and concluded that the Applicant was “denied the opportunity to meaningfully address the Court”. His Lordship then remarked that “Orders made in violation of natural justice are invalid notwithstanding that there may be no prejudice to the party who was not heard”. While Berger J.A. alluded to the fact that there is a limited exception to this rule of natural justice, His Lordship held that it did not apply in the circumstances. Accordingly, Justice Berger granted the Application for the Stay.