By John Chunn (October 31, 2022, 9:57 AM EDT) -- Appeal by appellants from Justice Phillips’ order setting parameters for hearing of their application to find the respondent in contempt of court on grounds that Municipal District (MD) was in contempt of Justice Nixon’s order, among others. Alston was the registered owner of certain property in southern Alberta. The other individual appellant lived with Alston on the property. South of the Alston property was property owned by the respondent, MD, and on it was the DeWinton Riding Club. Appellants filed a statement of claim alleging, among other things, that the MD approved construction of a housing and roadway that interfered with the natural flow and drainage of water from the riding stables. This resulted in contamination of water on the appellants’ property. They also alleged this contamination caused the residents on the property to become ill. MD filed an application to be allowed access to appellants’ property to conduct an inspection. Master Robertson granted the MD reasonable access to appellants’ property to allow its expert to conduct site inspection and testing subject to conditions. Appellants filed an application seeking remedies, including the closure of the riding club and a requirement that the MD address the alleged contamination. Application did allege as a ground that MD failed to follow the court order. After hearing submissions from the parties, Justice Phillips granted an order which narrowed the contempt proceedings to whether the MD was in contempt of Master Robertson’s order and whether the MD intentionally breached the terms of that order. It specified the contempt application would not address issues extrinsic to the formal order. The appellants sought to appeal Justice Phillips’ order and believed they needed permission to appeal. Their permission to appeal was denied....