C.L. v. Nova Scotia (Community Services)

C.L. v. Nova Scotia (Community Services)

The chambers judge concluded that the question of whether the trial judge's ruling was interlocutory and thus time-barred was sufficiently contested and potentially intertwined with the merits such that it exceeded the appropriate scope of a single judge in chambers; accordingly the motion to strike or dismiss the second ground of appeal was referred to the panel hearing the appeal and the panel should determine costs.

Citation
2012 NSCA 88
Parties
Respondent/appellant: C.L.; Respondent/appellant: S.S.; Applicant/respondent: Minister of Community Services
Court
Nova Scotia Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 August 2012
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Motion in Chambers Referred to Panel
Outcome
Motion to strike or dismiss appellants' second ground of appeal referred to the panel hearing the appeal
Legal Topics
Charter S.7 Challenge, Interlocutory Appeal, Appeal Time Limits, Single Judge Chambers Jurisdiction, Referral to Panel, Publication Restriction S.94
Source Language
English
Children and Family Law Constitutional Law Civil Procedure Administrative Law Charter S.7 Challenge Interlocutory Appeal Appeal Time Limits Single Judge Chambers Jurisdiction +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

C.L.

Respondent/appellant

S.S.

Respondent/appellant

Minister of Community Services

Applicant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Motion in Chambers Referred to Panel

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants' second ground of appeal (failure to hear Charter application) should be dismissed as out of time
  2. 2 Whether the chambers judge had authority to dismiss the ground under the Rules
  3. 3 Whether the trial judge's decision was interlocutory and subject to a 10-day appeal period

Ratio Decidendi

The chambers judge concluded that the question of whether the trial judge's ruling was interlocutory and thus time-barred was sufficiently contested and potentially intertwined with the merits such that it exceeded the appropriate scope of a single judge in chambers; accordingly the motion to strike or dismiss the second ground of appeal was referred to the panel hearing the appeal and the panel should determine costs.

Court Disposition

Motion to strike or dismiss appellants' second ground of appeal referred to the panel hearing the appeal

Orders

  • Refer the Minister's motion to the panel hearing the appeal pursuant to Rule 90.37(14)
  • Leave determination of costs, if any, on the motion to the panel