Members not exercising judicial functions when they sit on Canadian Judicial Council

Quebec judge allegedly captured on video in process of purchasing illicit substance

Judges and courts | APPOINTMENT, REMOVAL, DISQUALIFICATION AND DISCIPLINE OF JUDGES AND OTHER COURT OFFICERS | Judicial councils

Applicant was Superior Court of Quebec judge . In 2012, complaint was filed against applicant when Director of Criminal and Penal Prosecutions informed Chief Justice that applicant had been identified by drug trafficker as former client . Applicant was allegedly captured on video in process of purchasing illicit substance. In 2014, Canadian Judicial Council (CJC) constituted inquiry committee in accordance with s. 63(4) of Judges Act (JA) to conduct full inquiry and while committee rejected all allegations against applicant, it tendered report to Minister about contradictions, inconsistencies and implausibilities in evidence during hearing . In 2016, second complaint was filed against applicant related to his lack of credibility in first inquiry, and second inquiry committee created report finding that applicant had become disabled from due execution of office by reason of misconduct related to first inquiry . Applicant brought applications for judicial review . CJC unsuccessfully brought motions to strike applications for judicial review on basis of lack of jurisdiction . CJC appealed . Appeal dismissed. Reports and recommendations of CJC and its committees were subject to judicial review. CJC and its committees were included in definition of “federal board, commission or other tribunal” in section 2 of Federal Courts Act and CJC was not subject to any exception . While some members were appointed under Constitution Act, they were not exercising judicial functions when they sit on CJC. Possibility of reviewing legality of CJC’s decisions contributed to maintenance of rule of law and supervisory power exercised by Federal Court over CJC played important public interest role.

Canada (Conseil de la magistrature) c. Girouard (2019), 2019 CarswellNat 2009, 2019 CAF 148, J.D. Denis Pelletier J.A., Yves de Montigny J.A., and Mary J.L. Gleason J.A. (F.C.A.); affirmed (2018), 2018 CarswellNat 5088, 2018 CarswellNat 5089, 2018 FC 865, 2018 CF 865, Simon Noël J. (F.C.).

Case Law is a weekly summary of notable civil and criminal court decisions by the Supreme Court of Canada, the Federal Court of Canada and all Ontario courts. These cases may be found online in WestlawNext Canada. To subscribe, please visit store.thomsonreuters.ca

Free newsletter

Our newsletter is FREE and keeps you up to date on all the developments in the Ontario legal community. Please enter your email address below to subscribe.

Recent articles & video

Court of Appeal rules judge erred in finding hearsay evidence inadmissible

Case 'about breaking new ground' for accountability in coroner death investigations: Julian Falconer

Governments urged to review hate crime laws on the occasion of antisemitism, Islamophobia summits

Court of Appeal declines to apply common law reconciliation rule to void a cohabitation agreement

Immigration consultant loses judicial review application, took $110,000 from Syrian, Iraqi refugees

Documentary filmmakers challenging Twitter’s restrictions on promoting tweets featuring film trailer

Most Read Articles

Immigration consultant loses judicial review application, took $110,000 from Syrian, Iraqi refugees

Court of Appeal rules judge erred in finding hearsay evidence inadmissible

Documentary filmmakers challenging Twitter’s restrictions on promoting tweets featuring film trailer

Case 'about breaking new ground' for accountability in coroner death investigations: Julian Falconer