Commission Scolaire Francophone du Yukon No. 23 v. Yukon (Procureure Générale), 2012 YKCA 1

• Judge: Finch, C.J.B.C., Bennett and MacKenzie, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Yukon Territory)
• Case Date: February 08, 2012
• Jurisdiction: Yukon
• Citations: 2012 YKCA 1;(2012), 316 B.C.A.C. 184 (YukCA)

Comm. Scolaire v. Yukon (P.g.) (2012), 316 B.C.A.C. 184 (YukCA);

    537 W.A.C. 184

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2012] B.C.A.C. TBEd. FE.025

La Commission Scolaire Francophone du Yukon No. 23 (respondent/plaintiff) v. Procureure Générale du Territoire du Yukon (appellant/defendant)

(YU684; 2012 YKCA 1)

Indexed As: Commission Scolaire Francophone du Yukon No. 23 v. Yukon (Procureure Générale)

Yukon Court of Appeal

Finch, C.J.B.C., Bennett and MacKenzie, JJ.A.

February 8, 2012.

Summary:

The applicants applied to intervene on an appeal arising from an action between the plaintiff and defendant.

The Yukon Court of Appeal, per Groberman, J.A. (chambers judge), in a decision with neutral citation 2011 YKCA 11, refused to grant intervener status. The applicants applied for review, arguing that the fact that their applications for intervener status were heard before the appellant/defendant's factum was filed violated the sequence contemplated by rule 36(2) of the Yukon Court of Appeal Rules. The applicants argued further that the chambers judge erred in applying the principles governing intervener applications.

The Yukon Court of Appeal dismissed the application to vary the chambers judge's ruling.

Practice - Topic 685

Parties - Adding or substituting parties - Intervenors - On appeal - The applicants applied to intervene on an appeal arising from an action between the plaintiff and defendant - A chambers (appeal court) judge refused to grant intervener status - The applicants applied for review, arguing that the fact that their applications for intervener status were heard before the appellant/defendant's factum was filed violated the sequence contemplated by rule 36(2) of the Yukon Court of Appeal Rules - The applicants argued further that the chambers judge erred in applying the principles governing intervener applications - The Yukon Court of Appeal dismissed the application to vary the chambers judge's ruling - As to non-compliance with rule 36, it was the chambers judge who fixed the parties' filing schedule, with their agreement - On the merits, the judge made no error in the test applied or any other error of principle.

Statutes Noticed:

Yukon Court of Appeal Rules, rule 36(2) [para. 6].

Counsel:

Maxime Faille and François Baril, for the appellant;

Mark Power and Mathieu Stanton, for the proposed intervenors - La Fédération National des Conseils Scolaires Francophones;

Simon Ruel and Nicholas Malone, for the proposed intervenors - La Commission Nationale des Parents Francophones;

Robert Grant, Christian Paquette and Jean-Pierre Hachey, for the proposed intervenors - Le Conseil Scolaire Francophone de la Columbie-Britannique.

This application was heard by way of written submissions by Finch, C.J.B.C., Bennett and MacKenzie, JJ.A., of the Yukon Court of Appeal. The following decision was delivered by the court on February 8, 2012.