In what circumstances will the Court in B.C. consider a third party order?

In Prairie Hydraulic, Chamberlist, J. concluded: [para 28] In my view the court should not look behind the record in the Alberta action to determine what was intended by the parties. On its face, the order arising from the Alberta action makes the B.C. third party proceeding at bar and the parallel B.C. proceeding res judicata. The Alberta order is succinct and it should be given its normal effect. The dismissal of the counter-claim of Prairie in the Alberta action was fundamental to the decision arrived at by the parties therein to conclude that litigation. In my view there being no ambiguity arising from the order filed in the Alberta proceedings, this court ought not to look behind that order. While it may have a harsh result in its application, that is not to say that equity cannot be done by the court only looking at the record. This it seems to me is the heart of the quotation from Hoystead v. Commissioner of Taxation which was referred to with approval by Davey, C.J.B.C. in Morgan, supra...