The Applicants in this matter sought intervener status.

The Court noted that the test for interventions on Appeal was set out in Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform v Grande Prairie (City) [Grand Prairie], 2017 ABCA 280. In Grand Prairie the Court stated that Rules 14.37(2)(e) and 14.58 permit a single Judge to consider an Application to intervene and to impose conditions.

While granting intervenor status is discretionary and ought to be sparingly exercised, the Court in Grand Prairie noted several factors to consider in determining whether to grant intervenor status in an Appeal, including: (1) whether the presence of the intervenor is necessary for the Court to properly decide the matter; (2) whether the intervenor’s interest in the proceedings might not be fully protected by the parties; (3) whether the intervention will unduly delay the proceedings; (4) whether there might be prejudice to the parties if intervention is granted; (5) whether intervention will widen the dispute between the parties; and (6) whether the intervention will transform the Court into a political arena.

Here, the Court granted intervener status to both Applicants but limited them from raising any new grounds of Appeal, expanding the subject matter of the Appeal, or applying to introduce any fresh evidence. Further, the Applicants would have a limited time to speak and would not be allowed to seek costs for participation in the Appeal.