On November 2, 2017, the Plaintiffs sought and received two ex parte Orders against the Defendants. On December 5, 2017, the Defendants applied to Set Aside the Orders pursuant to Rule 9.15, which allows the Court to vary or discharge a Judgment or an Order that was made without notice. The Set Aside Application must be made within 20 days after the Applicant is served with the Judgment or Order. The Defendants were served with one of the Orders on November 10, 2017. The Defendants filed their Set Aside Application on December 5, 2017, 25 days later.

The Plaintiffs took issue with the late filing.  The Defendants responded that the Rule is not a strict limitation period, and cited Big Plans for Little Kids Ltd v Souster, 2022 ABCA 384, where the Court of Appeal emphasized that, while Rule 9.15 expects prompt action, the Court retains discretion to extend time and may require an explanation only where there is wilful or intentional delay. The Court was prepared to exercise its discretion to extend the deadline, noting that the Defendants acted promptly, just outside of the 20-day period. It could not be said there was any wilful or intentional delay by the Defendants. Given the timing of many parts of the Application, it was appropriate to extend the deadline in these circumstances and allow the Application to be heard on its merits.