- Parties: The appellant was His Majesty the King. The respondents were Mandy Easter and Dominic Shale Alexander.

- Subject Matter: In 2019, Mandy Easter brought the underlying statement of claim against her former common law spouse, Dominic Shale Alexander, and the Crown. She alleged that she suffered serious sexual, physical, and psychological abuse at his hands. The Crown brought appeals from two pre-trial orders in the same proceeding.

- Ruling: The appeal court ruled in the respondents’ favour and dismissed both appeals. Regarding the appeal from the first order, the appeal court decided that the motion judge made no legal error in considering whether the provisions of s. 269 of the National Defence Act, 1985 were unknowable to the Crown and by treating the proposed s. 269 amendment as raising a new and distinct defence, not as merely clarifying the already disputed issues. Regarding the appeal from the second order, the appeal court rejected the appellant’s argument that adjourning the trial was a material change in circumstances that justified granting its motion to revisit the motion judge’s first order. The appeal court also disagreed with the appellant’s argument that the motion judge failed to consider her decision’s impacts on the Crown.

- Date: The hearing was set on Sept. 4, 2024. The court released its decision on Oct. 29, 2024.

- Venue: This was a federal case before the Federal Court of Appeal.

- Amount: The appeal court awarded costs in an unspecified amount.