The Applicant, Hayden, sought leave to appeal Justice Rowbotham’s earlier decision which denied the Applicant’s Application to restore her Appeal after it was struck for failing to file the Appeal Record in time. Justice Rowbotham noted that Hayden applied pursuant to Rule 14.5(1)(a).

Rowbowtham J.A. stated that permission to appeal a Decision of a single appellate Judge will only be granted where the Applicant can demonstrate that: the issue to be appealed raises a serious question of general importance; the appellate Judge committed an error of law, jurisdiction, or principle; the appellate Judge unreasonably exercised their discretion; or, the Decision being appealed was based on a misapprehension of important facts. The chances of success of the proposed Appeal, the standard of appellate review, and the ensuing delay, are additional factors to be considered in an Application under Rule 14.5.

Justice Rowbotham emphasized that the role of the appellate Justice hearing an Appeal under Rule 14.5 was that of “gate keeper”, and the Justice must be persuaded that the issue warrants the attention of a three member panel. Rowbotham J.A. held that Hayden’s Application was a rehearing of the previously dismissed Application and Hayden had failed to demonstrate that any of the circumstances warranting a three member panel were present. The Application was therefore dismissed.