What is the test for a motion to withdraw a petition against the Minister of Education?

18 A.C. and her parents now appeal to this court, arguing that the motions judge erred when she held that they must start an action afresh. They argue that the court should not have allowed the petition to be withdrawn. Alternatively, even if the petition was withdrawn, their motion should continue because the case law and the legislation require a mandatory post-apprehension review. Even if a mandatory post-apprehension review is not necessary in every case, their motion should be heard without the necessity of starting another action afresh based on the principles of Charter accessibility arising from the case of Doucet-Boudreau v. Nova Scotia (Minister of Education), 2003 SCC 62, [2003] 3 S.C.R. 3.