STYLES v CANADIAN ASSOCIATION OF COUNSEL TO EMPLOYERS, 2016 ABCA 218
14.58: Intervenor status on appeal
14.37: Single appeal judges
The Canadian Association of Counsel to Employers (“CACE”) applied to intervene in an Appeal brought by an employer regarding a dispute about the employee’s rights pursuant to a long term incentive plan. CACE is a not for profit corporation and association of employment lawyers. Its mandate is to ensure that advancements in Canadian law adequately reflect the interest of employers in many different contexts.
Justice McDonald noted that Rules 14.37(2) and 14.58 govern the authority to grant intervener status in an Appeal and to impose any conditions. As per Rule 14.58(3), the intervener is not permitted to raise or argue issues not raised in the Appeal, unless specifically permitted. The test for intervener status is whether the Applicant: (i) is directly and significantly affected by appeal; and (ii) has experience and a fresh perspective on the subject matter of the Appeal that is useful for its resolution.
In analyzing the factors to consider, McDonald J.A. held that CACE has no more direct interest in the outcome of the Appeal than do employment lawyers generally. Precedential value of a case does not constitute a direct interest justifying intervener status. Further, counsel for the employer may simply argue what principles CACE intended to address on the Appeal. As such, CACE would not bring a unique or fresh perspective to the Appeal. Intervener status was therefore denied.View CanLII Details