Leave to appeal

Tomic v. Tough, 2013 BCCA 212 deals with the criteria for granting leave to appeal

[22]        The criteria for granting leave to appeal were addressed by Saunders J.A. inGoldman, Sachs & Co. v. Sessions, 2000 BCCA 326 (CanLII), 2000 BCCA 326 at para. 10 (in Chambers).  They include:

(1)        whether the point on appeal is of significance to the practice;

(2)        whether the point raised is of significance to the action itself;

(3)        whether the appeal is prima facie meritorious or, on the other hand, whether it is frivolous; and

(4)        whether the appeal will unduly hinder the progress of the action.

[23]        On an application for leave to appeal, the "overarching concern is the interests of justice": Hanlon v. Nanaimo (Regional District), 2007 BCCA 538 (CanLII), 2007 BCCA 538 at para. 2, 72 B.C.L.R. (4th) 341 (Saunders J.A. in Chambers).  The four factors listed in Goldman are "all considered under the rubric of the interests of justice": Vancouver (City) v. Zhang, 2007 BCCA 280 (CanLII), 2007 BCCA 280 at para. 10 (Saunders J.A. in Chambers).