On a motion for leave to intervene in a pending constitutional challenge to the mental-illness exclusion from medical assistance in dying, the court granted leave to four public-interest interveners to participate in an urgent July motion seeking individual constitutional relief under s. 24(1) of the Charter.
Applying Rule 13.02 and the generous constitutional intervention framework, the court found each proposed intervener had a sufficient interest, distinct perspective, or recognized expertise capable of assisting the court.
The court held it was premature to determine intervention in the underlying application because the evidentiary record was incomplete and additional intervener requests might follow.
Strict limits were imposed: no new evidence, no new issues, no submissions on the individual applicant’s personal circumstances, and no costs.
