The proposed interveners brought a late motion for leave to intervene in an application for judicial review.
The respondent opposed the motion, arguing the interveners lacked a distinct perspective and sought to supplement the evidentiary record.
The Divisional Court granted leave to intervene on strict terms, limiting the interveners to five minutes of oral submissions, prohibiting them from repeating the applicant's submissions, and barring them from supplementing the evidentiary record or taking a position on the ultimate disposition.
During the hearing, the interveners attempted to rely on new evidence, which the court rejected as procedurally unfair.
