- Parties: The applicants were Leah Diome, Brendan Wyler Diome-Montour, Peter Tekhanawatekwon, and Dennis Diome. The respondents were Deidre Diome, Timothy Deer Sr., and Raianerahstha Diome Deer. 

- Subject Matter: The underlying case was a dispute involving the ownership of land and the partition of family businesses, primarily concerning the sale of tobacco products. The applicants requested leave to appeal the Superior Court’s Oct. 10, 2024 safeguard order. They filed an amended application for leave to appeal and referred to allegedly indispensable new evidence that they wanted to introduce via a separate application. The applicants asked the appeal court to postpone the hearing of their leave application to allow them to present it to a panel alongside their application for leave to present new evidence. 

- Ruling: The appeal court ruled in the respondents’ favour and dismissed the application for leave to appeal and the request for postponement. Even if it would consider the new evidence that the applicants sought to introduce, the court held that it would not impact its appreciation of the merits of the application for leave to appeal. The overriding principles of proportionality and the interests of justice made it patently clear that there was no compelling reason in the circumstances to postpone the hearing of the application for leave to appeal, the appeal court said. 

- Date: The appeal court released its decision on Dec. 3, 2024. 

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

- Amount: The appeal court awarded legal costs.