Background:

• Renxian Reinink filed two applications: one to extend the time to appeal a 2019 decision dismissing her judicial review application and another for a restricted court access order.
• Both applications were denied in February 2024 by Justice Antonio.

Issue:

• Reinink argued the denial was unfair as she did not receive the respondent's written submissions in advance due to an administrative error.
• The respondent acknowledged the error but argued Reinink should have known about the filings via an automated court email.

Key Legal Considerations:

• Permission to Appeal: Under Rule 14.5(2), permission requires demonstrating a compelling reason for a panel review.
• Factors include:
  • Strength of the argument.
  • Importance of the issue to the parties.
  • Broader legal significance.

Decision:

• While the lack of service was noted as significant, the respondent later provided the missing materials, and Reinink was allowed to submit further arguments.
• Her further submissions did not alter the court's findings:
  • Extension of Time: No special circumstances, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, justified her delay in appealing.
  • Restricted Court Access: No exceptional circumstances were established for this order.
• The court found no reasonable chance of success for the appeal.

Outcome:

• Application for permission to appeal denied.
• No monetary award specified.