The proposed interveners, two unions, brought motions for leave to intervene in an application for judicial review concerning the payment of post-retirement benefits by a school board.
The judicial review was scheduled to be heard immediately after a related Stated Case in which both proposed interveners were already participating.
The court dismissed one union's motion to intervene, finding it could efficiently make its arguments in the Stated Case proceeding without prolonging the judicial review.
However, the court added the other union as a responding party because it was a joint signatory to the collective agreement at issue in the underlying arbitration.
