WestlawNext Canada insight Blog

Digest of the Week | Practice on appeal

Report that appellant sought to admit could have been obtained earlier and the probative value of the report was low.

O. (R.) v. F. (D.)

(2016), 2016 ABCA 170, 2016 CarswellAlta 964, (Alta. C.A.) [Alberta]

Alberta Court of Appeal

Practice on appeal -- Powers and duties of appellate court -- Evidence on appeal -- New evidence

Appellant R was found to be vexatious litigant, by case management judge -- R was also found to be in contempt of court for failing to comply with restricted court access orders -- R's pleadings were struck -- R was restrained from contacting respondent D, or disclosing D's identity or that of his wife, children or employer -- R was ordered to pay costs of $217,000 -- R claimed that she had new evidence that was unavailable to her at hearing -- R appealed from vexatious litigant order and contempt order -- Appeal allowed in part as to vexatious litigant order -- Appeal dismissed as to contempt order -- Report that R sought to admit could have been obtained before hearing, if adjournment was requested -- Probative value of new evidence was not high -- Outcome would not have likely been affected by admission of evidence -- Affidavit and transcript evidence was similarly not "new" in sense that it would have affected outcome -- This evidence was properly seen as attempt to bolster evidence already before court.
© Copyright WestlawNext Canada, Thomson Reuters Canada Limited. All rights reserved.