NORTHBACK HOLDINGS CORPORATION v ALBERTA (INFORMATION AND PRIVACY COMMISSIONER), 2026 ABCA 256

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation (“CTF”) applied for leave to intervene in an Appeal of a decision dismissing Northback Holdings Corporation’s (“Northback”) Application to compel the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner (the “OIPC”) to expedite its review of requests for information made pursuant to the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, SA 2000 c F-25 (the “Act”).

CTF, a not-for-profit federal corporation, asserted that Northback’s Appeal raised issues of significant public interest concerning timely access to government information and the role of the Courts in addressing systemic delays. Northback took no position on CTF’s Application, while the OIPC opposed it.

Northback’s Appeal concerned the consequences of delay and the impact of “queue jumping” and whether an Order compelling expedited review would adversely affect other participants awaiting review. Although Northback referred to the quasi-constitutional nature of the Act in its written submissions, it did not advance any arguments based on the Charter. As intervenor, CTF nevertheless sought to make submissions connecting the Act’s quasi-constitutional nature to Section 2(b) of the Charter, contending that such submissions fell naturally within Northback’s quasi-constitutional arguments.

Appeal Justice Feth considered Rules 14.37 and 14.58 and the factors governing intervening set out in JJ v AK, 2025 ABCA 113. Feth J.A. emphasized that intervenors could not raise new issues on appeal, challenge findings of fact, or advocate for a particular outcome.

Applying those principles, the Court concluded that CTF had not met the test for intervening. Feth J.A. held that the proposed Charter submissions would raise a new issue not advanced by the parties. Feth J.A. further noted that the record before the Court was insufficient to warrant assessment of this new issue and that CTF had not demonstrated any particular expertise in constitutional or Charter matters. Finally, the Appeal Justice Feth observed that the specific Charter issue identified by CTF had already been addressed by the Supreme Court of Canada in Ontario (Public Safety and Security) v Criminal Lawyers’ Association, 2010 SCC 23.

Accordingly, the Court denied CTF’s Application to intervene in Northback’s Appeal.