Bahcheli v. Yorkton Securities Inc., 2012 ABCA 166

In Bahcheli v. Yorkton Securities Inc., the Alberta Court of Appeal considered the appropriate standard of review for an appeal from a Master. The subrule, 6.14(3), regarding appeals from Master’s judgments, was amended in July 2011. Previous case law has indicated that the appropriate standard of review is deferential, barring questions of law alone. The Court discusses issues surrounding a deferential standard of review, and holds that the appropriate standard of review on appeal from a Master to a judge, on all issues, is correctness.

The previous subrule allowed for new evidence to be admitted if it is “significant enough that it could have affected the master’s decision”. The new subrule allows for evidence to be admitted if it is “relevant and material” in the opinion of the judge hearing the appeal. The Court of Appeal indicates that this rule is “probably wider” than the last. The Court confirms that the standard of review is correctness. The appellant filed his statement of claim years ago, and the Master dismissed the suit under the old five-year “drop-dead” Rule, R 244.1, and the chambers judge applied transitional R 15.4(1) in dismissing the appeal. The substantive issue in the case is about dismissing a suit for non-prosecution under the new two-year “drop dead” Rule, R 4.33(1), amended in July 2011 from the old R 244.1. The appellant claims he laboured in the fields of regulatory and administrative law, which has advanced this suit considerably and the “drop dead” rule should not have been applied. The Court of Appeal indicates that these steps before various administrative bodies did not add any new evidence that would materially advance his case. Thus, the Court of Appeal finds it is irrelevant how the judge-made tests under the Rules are or were framed because the appellant does not satisfy any test in the Rules or in any case law. The Court confirms that the Master and the judge were right to dismiss the suit under the “drop dead” Rules, and the appeal is therefore dismissed. 

Link to Decision

Teresa MacLean

*