Question: Presumably, an appeal to the decision of the Lands Commisioner (dismissal of CLF easement application) has been filed with the appropriate court with higher authority.

The mining tribunal must now wait for the Divisional Court of Appeals' decision before ordering Cliffs to pay CCC's legal costs for the hearing of Merits and a final cost award decision on the earlier motion to Exclude Evidence.

Serving "Notice of Appeal" to KWG is a mere courtesy, and has no legal implication? Also presumably, CLF would need to "serve" the Commisioner for its appeal action.

Serving CCC notice was not a mere courtesy. It's required by law. Cliffs also served the MNR. It also served the OMLC, so they can assemble the court documents and evidence to send to the Divisional Court of Appeals.

But, KWG will be "forced" to prepare for the Appeal and will need to spend money and time (=money). It would be expected that the expenditure would be reimbursed by CLF, especially if CLF lost the Appeal

"An appeal is different from a trial and is not a rehearing of the case. There can be no witnesses and no new evidence (except in very limited circumstances). Not all errors will change the outcome of a case on appeal. "Guide_to_Appeals_in_Divisional_Court_EN.pdf