The appellant insurer sought leave to appeal the order of the Chambers Judge who dismissed it’s application to be added as a party or intervener in an underlying liability action in the Supreme Court of British Columbia.

[2011] B.C.J. No. 1336

2011 BCCA 326

British Columbia Court of Appeal (In Bankruptcy and Insolvency)

P.A. Kirkpatrick J.A. (In Chambers)

July 8, 2011

The appellant insurer sought leave from the Court to appeal the order of the Chambers Judge who dismissed the insurer’s application to be added as a party or intervener in an underlying liability action in the Supreme Court of British Columbia and found that the insurer’s counsel was not permitted to defend Pope & Talbot, a company under protection from its creditors pursuant to the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-36. In the underlying liability action former employees of Pope & Talbot brought a class proceeding against Pope & Talbot on the basis that it was a current or former director of its subsidiary.

The Court found that the insurer did require leave to appeal but granted leave on the basis that the issue had been one at first instance in Chambers and was of significance to the practice generally.