An individual applied ostensibly on behalf of Park Avenue Flooring Inc. (“Park Avenue”) for permission to appeal the Decision of a single Appellate Judge to a panel of the Court of Appeal pursuant to Rule 14.5(1)(a). The previous single Appellate Judge had ruled that the individual Applicant could not represent Park Avenue herself.

Rowbotham J.A. held that the Court does not have discretion to allow a non-lawyer to represent a party in Court where the representation contravenes section 106 of the Legal Professions Act, RSA 2000, c L-8. This section precludes an officer of the corporation from representing the corporation unless the officer is a member of the Law Society. Justice Rowbotham held that the combined effect of Rule 2.33, which outlines when the Court can permit a person to assist a party before the Court, and the Legal Professions Act, barred the individual Applicant from representing the corporation herself. Rowbotham J.A. concluded that none of the Applicant’s arguments raised an error of law or principle, nor did they raise a serious question of general importance. As such, the Application for permission to appeal to a panel of the Court of Appeal was dismissed.

Her Ladyship also referred to Rule 14.88, which provides that unless otherwise ordered, the successful party in an Appeal or Application is entitled to a Costs award against the unsuccessful party. Rowbotham J.A. held that if the Respondent sought different direction as to Costs, it could make submissions in writing, as could the Applicant.