That is why he included a comeback clause in his order and specifically invited parties to resort to it in his endorsement. The fact that the CCAA provides that an appeal of an initial order is only available with leave indicates that appeals in CCAA proceedings should be limited. An appeal court should be cautious about intervening in the CCAA process, especially at an early stage. A colleague has suggested that a judge exercising a supervisory function under the C.C.A.A. is more like a judge hearing a trial, who makes orders in the course of that trial, than a chambers judge who makes interlocutory orders in proceedings for which he has no further responsibility. . . . In supervising a proceeding under the C.C.A.A. orders are made, and orders are varied as changing circumstances require.
Orders depend upon a careful and delicate balancing of a variety of interests and of problems.
I do not say that leave will never be granted in a C.C.A.A. proceeding. But the effect upon all parties concerned will be an important consideration in deciding whether leave ought to be granted. However, it is premature to grant such leave at this juncture in the Algoma proceedings. Farley J. s order was only an initial order brought on an urgent basis to deal with seemingly desperate circumstances. Moreover, the order specifically opened the proceedings to all interested parties and invited dissatisfied parties to bring their concerns to the court on a timely basis.