TENG v ALBERTA (SENIORS, COMMUNITY AND SOCIAL SERVICES)

The Applicant sough to restore their appeal, which had been struck pursuant to Rule 14.64 due to a failure to file a factum within the appropriate time. The appeal was initially brought regarding the dismissal of the Applicant’s application for Judicial Review of a decision of the Citizen’s Appeal Panel.

Following the commencement of the initial appeal, the Applicant’s factum was to be filed on June 25, 2025. The Applicant requested, and was granted, several extensions for time to file their factum. The Applicant did eventually submit a factum but upon review of the submission, the Case Management Office determined that the materials were not acceptable pursuant to Rule 14.23 and the Applicant’s appeal was struck pursuant to Rule 14.64.

The Court considered the relevant case law, and in applying the test for restoring an appeal, Antonio J.A. looked to whether there was an explanation for the Appellant’s actions and to the merits of the proposed appeal. The Applicant had provided no reasonable explanation for the defect which resulted in their appeal being struck. The Appellants pointed to the fact that they were relying upon their daughter for assistance in the proceedings, and that their daughter was not a lawyer.

The Court did not find this fact to be a reasonable explanation. The Court also held that appeal itself did not have merit, as the Applicant’s position was largely that there were additional documents which had not been submitted to the Court in the initial application for judicial review. The Court was not convinced that the documents in question would satisfy the test for the admission of new evidence, as the documents could have been adduced earlier and were of little relevance to the issues. As such, the Applicant’s application to restore the appeal was dismissed.