The Appellant, Erdmann, sought leave to amend her Notice of Appeal to include a Constitutional challenge. The Appellant was not just seeking to expand on the document filed, but the actual scope of the argument of the Appeal to include additional issues. Justice Watson noted that the role of a single Judge on a Court of Appeal motion is set out in Rules 14.37 and 14.38.

Upon review of the documents attached to the Notice of Appeal, Watson J.A. stated that the content suggested that the Appellant raised a variety of issues, not all of which were separately set out as grounds in her Notice of Appeal. The Constitutional challenge which the Appellant sought to include contained various unsworn allegations of fact, including assertions about the history of proceedings. It became apparent during the Appellant’s oral argument that the substance of her Constitutional challenge was that the Respondent violated the Regulated Accounting Profession Act, RSA 2000, c R-12, and the requirements of due and fair process. The Appellant was not actually challenging the constitutionality of any part of the legislation. The Application was therefore dismissed.