This Application was for Intervener status in a Judicial Review proceeding. Prior to the new Rules, the granting of Intervener status was guided by common law principles, the relevance of which remains due to the considerable discretion provided by Rule 2.10. With reference to existing case law, Browne J. stated “[t]he granting of Intervener status is discretionary and should be exercised sparingly.  Courts should be cautious not to allow Interveners to expand the lawsuit, delay proceedings or prejudice a party”. Her Ladyship also referred to decisions espousing the proposition that intervention may be allowed where the proposed Intervener is specially affected by the decision facing the Court. Because of the nature of this particular case, the Court referred to case law indicating that when there is a “constitutional dimension”, a Court is generally more lenient in granting Intervener status. Browne J. granted Intervener status to the Applicant, subject to terms and conditions that limited participation which would have delayed or expanded the Judicial Review into a Trial.