The applicants sought leave to appeal a decision adding two solicitors and their law firms as intervening parties in a complex land transaction dispute.
The disputing parties had each initiated separate actions against the same lawyers for negligence.
The court found no conflicting case law regarding Rule 13 of the Rules of Civil Procedure in the context of private litigation, noting that the benchmark of caution applies but the need to avoid multiplicity of proceedings justified the intervention.
The motion for leave to appeal was dismissed.
