Structure-Of-The-Courts.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Ontario Justice Education Network Handout: Structure of the Courts in Canada SUPREME COURT OF CANADA The Supreme Court of Canada is Canada's highest court. It is the final court of appeal for all litigants, whether individuals, organizations or government. Its jurisdiction includes both the civil law of the province of Quebec and the common law of the other provinces (including Ontario) and the territories. The Supreme Court has jurisdiction over disputes in all areas of the law, including constitutional law, administrative law, criminal law and civil law. PROVINCIAL AND TERRITORIAL COURTS Each Canadian province and territory has it own court system, with trial courts, (provincial/territorial court and superior court) and a Court of Appeal or appellate division that hears appeals from the lower courts (with the exception of Nunavut, which only has one level of trial court). Ontario has the Ontario Court of Justice, the Superior Court of Justice, and the Court of Appeal for Ontario. FEDERAL COURT SYSTEM Parallel to the Ontario court system and the court systems of other Canadian provinces and territories, is the Federal court system. The Federal Court of Canada hears certain matters of federal concern that are set out in statute, including claims against the Government of Canada and civil suits in federally-regulated areas such as immigration, and intellectual property (e.g. copyright). The Federal Court of Appeal hears appeals from the Federal Court of Canada, the Tax Court of Canada and the Immigration and Refugee Board and other Boards created by the Federal government. In some cases, parties may be able to sue in either the federal court system or the Ontario court system. www.ojen.ca .

Copy Link

Recommended publications

The Education of a Judge Begins Long Before Judicial Appointment
T H E EDUCATION O F A JUD G E … The Honourable Brian Lennox, Justice of the Ontario Court of Justice The education of a judge begins long before judicial appointment. Judges are first and foremost lawyers. In Canada, that means that they typically have an undergraduate university degree1, followed by a three‐year degree from a Faculty of Law, involving studies in a wide variety of legal subjects, including contracts, real estate, business, torts, tax law, family, civil and criminal law, together with practice‐ oriented courses on the application of the law. The law degree is followed by a period of six to twelve months of practical training with a law firm. Before being allowed to work as a lawyer, the law school graduate will have to pass a set of comprehensive Law Society exams on the law, legal practice and ethics. In total, most lawyers will have somewhere between seven and nine years of post‐high school education when they begin to practice. It is not enough to have a law degree in order to be appointed as a judge. Most provinces and the federal government2 require that a lawyer have a minimum of 10 years of experience before being eligible for appointment. It is extremely rare that a lawyer is appointed as a judge with only 10 years’ experience. On average, judges have worked for 15 to 20 years as a lawyer before appointment and most judges are 45 to 52 years of age at the time of their appointment. They come from a variety of backgrounds and experiences and have usually practised before the courts to which they are appointed.
[Show full text]
National Directory of Courts in Canada
Catalogue no. 85-510-XIE National Directory of Courts in Canada August 2000 Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics Statistics Statistique Canada Canada How to obtain more information Specific inquiries about this product and related statistics or services should be directed to: Information and Client Service, Statistics Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0T6 (telephone: (613) 951-9023 or 1 800 387-2231). For information on the wide range of data available from Statistics Canada, you can contact us by calling one of our toll-free numbers. You can also contact us by e-mail or by visiting our Web site. National inquiries line 1 800 263-1136 National telecommunications device for the hearing impaired 1 800 363-7629 Depository Services Program inquiries 1 800 700-1033 Fax line for Depository Services Program 1 800 889-9734 E-mail inquiries [email protected] Web site www.statcan.ca Ordering and subscription information This product, Catalogue no. 85-510-XPB, is published as a standard printed publication at a price of CDN $30.00 per issue. The following additional shipping charges apply for delivery outside Canada: Single issue United States CDN $ 6.00 Other countries CDN $ 10.00 This product is also available in electronic format on the Statistics Canada Internet site as Catalogue no. 85-510-XIE at a price of CDN $12.00 per issue. To obtain single issues or to subscribe, visit our Web site at www.statcan.ca, and select Products and Services. All prices exclude sales taxes. The printed version of this publication can be ordered by • Phone (Canada and United States) 1 800 267-6677 • Fax (Canada and United States) 1 877 287-4369 • E-mail [email protected] • Mail Statistics Canada Dissemination Division Circulation Management 120 Parkdale Avenue Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0T6 • And, in person at the Statistics Canada Reference Centre nearest you, or from authorised agents and bookstores.
[Show full text]
Special Series on the Federal Dimensions of Reforming the Supreme Court of Canada
SPECIAL SERIES ON THE FEDERAL DIMENSIONS OF REFORMING THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA The Supreme Court of Canada: A Chronology of Change Jonathan Aiello Institute of Intergovernmental Relations School of Policy Studies, Queen’s University SC Working Paper 2011 21 May 1869 Intent on there being a final court of appeal in Canada following the Bill for creation of a Supreme country’s inception in 1867, John A. Macdonald, along with Court is withdrawn statesmen Télesphore Fournier, Alexander Mackenzie and Edward Blake propose a bill to establish the Supreme Court of Canada. However, the bill is withdrawn due to staunch support for the existing system under which disappointed litigants could appeal the decisions of Canadian courts to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) sitting in London. 18 March 1870 A second attempt at establishing a final court of appeal is again Second bill for creation of a thwarted by traditionalists and Conservative members of Parliament Supreme Court is withdrawn from Quebec, although this time the bill passed first reading in the House. 8 April 1875 The third attempt is successful, thanks largely to the efforts of the Third bill for creation of a same leaders - John A. Macdonald, Télesphore Fournier, Alexander Supreme Court passes Mackenzie and Edward Blake. Governor General Sir O’Grady Haly gives the Supreme Court Act royal assent on September 17th. 30 September 1875 The Honourable William Johnstone Ritchie, Samuel Henry Strong, The first five puisne justices Jean-Thomas Taschereau, Télesphore Fournier, and William are appointed to the Court Alexander Henry are appointed puisne judges to the Supreme Court of Canada.
[Show full text]
Practice and Procedure the Applicable Rules Of
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE THE APPLICABLE RULES OF EVIDENCE IN FEDERAL COURT: A SHORT PRIMER ON A TRICKY QUESTION Whether at trial or during interlocutory proceedings, litigators need to know the applicable rules of evidence, since there are import- ant variations in provincial evidence law. The largest difference, of course, is between the civil law of QueÂbec and laws of the nine common-law provinces. Yet significant differences exist even between the common law provinces themselves. Admissions made during discovery can be contradicted at trial in Ontario, but not in Saskatchewan.1 Spoliation of evidence requires intentional conduct in British Columbia before remedies will be granted, but not in New Brunswick.2 Evidence obtained through an invasion of privacy is inadmissible in Manitoba, while the other provinces have yet to legislate on this issue.3 1. Marchand (Litigation Guardian of) v. Public General Hospital Society of Chatham (2000), 43 C.P.C. (5th) 65, 51 O.R. (3d) 97, 138 O.A.C. 201 (Ont. C.A.) at paras. 72-86, leave to appeal refused [2001] 2 S.C.R. x, 156 O.A.C. 358 (note), 282 N.R. 397 (note) (S.C.C.); Branco v. American Home Assur- ance Co., 2013 SKQB 98, 6 C.C.E.L. (4th) 175, 20 C.C.L.I. (5th) 22 (Sask. Q.B.) at paras. 96-101, additional reasons 2013 SKQB 442, 13 C.C.E.L. (4th) 323, [2014] I.L.R. I-5534, varied on other issues without comment on this point 2015 SKCA 71, 24 C.C.E.L.
[Show full text]
COVID-19 Guide: In-Person Hearings at the Federal Court
COVID-19 Guide: In-person Hearings at the Federal Court OVERVIEW This guide seeks to outline certain administrative measures that are being taken by the Court to ensure the safety of all individuals who participate in an in-person-hearing. It is specifically directed to the physical use of courtrooms. For all measures that are to be taken outside of the courtroom, but within common areas of a Court facility, please refer to the guide prepared by the Courts Administrative Service, entitled Resuming In-Person Court Operations. You are also invited to view the Court’s guides for virtual hearings. Additional restrictions may apply depending on the evolving guidance of the local or provincial public health authorities, and in situations where the Court hearing is conducted in a provincial or territorial facility. I. CONTEXT Notwithstanding the reopening of the Court for in-person hearings, the Court will continue to schedule all applications for judicial review as well as all general sittings to be heard by video conference (via Zoom), or exceptionally by teleconference. Subject to evolving developments, parties to these and other types of proceedings are free to request an in-person hearing1. In some instances, a “hybrid” hearing, where the judge and one or more counsel or parties are in the hearing room, while other counsel, parties and/or witnesses participate via Zoom, may be considered. The measures described herein constitute guiding principles that can be modified by the presiding Judge or Prothonotary. Any requests to modify these measures should be made as soon as possible prior to the hearing, and can be made by contacting the Registry.
[Show full text]
9780470736821.C01.Pdf
Includes the Family Law Act, Child Support Guidelines, Divorce Act, Arbitration Act, and Arbitration Act Regulations CANADIAN FAMILY LAW An indispensable, clearly written guide to Canadian law on • marriage • separation • divorce • spousal and child support • child custody and access • property rights • estate rights • domestic contracts • enforcement • same-sex relationships • alternate dispute resolution MALCOLM C. KRONBY Kronby_10thE_Book.indb 1 06/11/09 8:58 AM Copyright © 2010 by Malcolm C. Kronby All rights reserved. No part of this work covered by the copyright herein may be reproduced or used in any form or by any means—graphic, electronic or mechanical without the prior written permission of the publisher. Any request for photocopying, recording, taping or information storage and retrieval systems of any part of this book shall be directed in writing to The Canadian Copyright Licensing Agency (Access Copyright). For an Access Copyright license, visit www.accesscopyright.ca or call toll free 1-800-893-5777. Care has been taken to trace ownership of copyright material contained in this book. The publisher will gladly receive any information that will enable them to rectify any reference or credit line in subsequent editions. This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in re- gard to the subject matter covered. It is sold on the understanding that the Publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services. If professional advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought. Library and Archives Canada Cataloguing in Publication Data Kronby, Malcolm C., 1934- Canadian family law / Malcolm C. Kronby.—10th ed.
[Show full text]
Submission to the Saskatchewan Provincial Court Commission November 2011
SSuubbmmiissssiioonn ttoo tthhee SSaasskkaattcchheewwaann PPrroovviinncciiaall CCoouurrtt CCoommmmiissssiioonn Saskatchewan Provincial Court Judges Association November 21, 2011 2011 Provincial Court Commission November 2011 Submission of the The Saskatchewan Provincial Court Judges’ Association Table of Contents Page Part I Introduction . .. 1 Part II Provincial Court Of Saskatchewan – An Overview . 2 A. Circuit Map . 3.1 Part III Mandate of the Provincial Court Commission . 7 Part IV Factors for Consideration . 13 A. The Trial Judges’ Role and Judicial Independence . 13 1. Responsibilities of a Trial Court Judge . 13 2. The Provincial Court and Judicial Independence . 19 3. The Work of the Provincial Court. .22 i. Criminal Jurisdiction . 23 ii. New Offences and Legislative Requirements . 25 iii. Criminal Division Workload . 35 a) The Judicial Complement . 35 b) Crime Rate in Saskatchewan . .37 iv. Civil Jurisdiction . .40 v. Family Jurisdiction . .46 vi. Youth Criminal Justice Act Jurisdiction . 47 vii. The Public We Serve . 49 a) Unrepresented and Self Represented Persons . 49 b) First Appearances in Provincial Court . .50 i SPCJA Submission to the Saskatchewan Provincial Court Commission November 2011 c) Emotional Problems, Learning Disorders and Mental Health Disabilities . .51 d) Literacy Problems . 52 e) Gladue Inquiries. 52 f) French Trials and Interpreters. 52 h) Spotlight in the Media. 53 viii. Accessibility . .57 B. Attracting the Most Qualified Applicants. .63 1. Tax Implications for Private Practitioners . 76 C. Economic and Market Factors. .78 1. Saskatchewan - Leading the Nation . 78 2. Cost of Living in Saskatchewan. .82 D. Salaries Paid to Other Trial Judges in Saskatchewan . 84 E. Salaries Paid to Other Trial Judges in Canada. 90 Part V Recommendations .
[Show full text]
Canada's Admiralty Court in the Twentieth Century
Canada's Admiralty Court in the Twentieth Century Arthur J. Stone* The author outlines the debate surrounding the L'auteur traite du dabat ayant entour6 ]a creation creation of Canada's admiralty court. This debate was d'une Cour d'amiraut6 an Canada. Ce dtbat 6tait ali- fuelled by the desire for autonomy from England and ment6 par ]a volont6 d'une plus grande autonomie vis- the disagreement amongst Canadian politicians re- A-vis l'Angleterre, de meme que par le d~saccord entre garding which court was best suited to exercise admi- les politiciens canadiens quant A la cour la plus appro- ralty jurisdiction. In 1891, more than thirty years after pride pour avoir juridiction en mati~re de droit mari- this debate began, the Exchequer Court of Canada, a time. En 1891, apris plus de trente ans de dtbats, fut national admiralty court, was declared, replacing the crede la Cour de l'&chiquier du Canada, une cour unpopular British vice-admiralty courts. The jurisdic- d'amirantd nationale qui remplaga les impopulaires 2002 CanLIIDocs 40 tion of this court was generally consistent with the ex- cours britanniques de vice-amiraut6. La juridiction de isting English admiralty jurisdiction; it was not until cette cour 6tait gdndralement en accord avec la juridic- 1931 that Canada was able to decide the jurisdiction of tion des cours d'amirautd britanniques; il faflut attendre its own court. Since then, this jurisdiction has been en- 1931 pour que le Canada soit capable de d6cider de ]a larged by federal legislative measures, most notably the juridiction de ses propres tribunaux.
[Show full text]
Independent Advisory Board for Supreme Court of Canada Judicial Appointments
Independent Advisory Board for Supreme Court of Canada Judicial Appointments Report on the 2021 Process July 28, 2021 Independent Advisory Board for Comité consultatif indépendant Supreme Court of Canada sur la nomination des juges de la Judicial Appointments Cour suprême du Canada July 28, 2021 The Right Honourable Justin Trudeau Prime Minister of Canada 80 Wellington Street Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A2 Dear Prime Minister: Pursuant to our Terms of Reference, the Independent Advisory Board for Supreme Court of Canada Judicial Appointments submits this report on the 2021 process, including information on the mandate and the costs of the Advisory Board’s activities, statistics relating to the applications received, and recommendations for improvements to the process. We thank you for the opportunity to serve on the Advisory Board and to participate in such an important process. Respectfully, The Right Honourable Kim Campbell, C.P., C.C., O.B.C., Q.C. Chairperson of the Independent Advisory Board for Supreme Court of Canada Judicial Appointments Advisory Board members: David Henry Beverley Noel Salmon Signa A. Daum Shanks Jill Perry The Honourable Louise Charron Erika Chamberlain Independent Advisory Board for Comité consultatif indépendant Supreme Court of Canada sur la nomination des juges de la Judicial Appointments Cour suprême du Canada Table of Contents 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1 2. Establishment of the Advisory Board and the
[Show full text]
Canadian Insolvency Maritime
The Confluence of Insolvency and Maritime Law in Canada: Navigating Troubled Waters By Kieran E. Siddall, Shelley Chapelski & Jason Kostyniuk Bull, Housser & Tupper LLP Vancouver, Canada When claims arise against an insolvent shipowner, the resulting confluence of insolvency law and maritime law and their respective procedures can be tricky to navigate. This article provides a basic overview of the two regimes in Canada, and briefly reviews some Canadian jurisprudence addressing the jurisdictional conflict that can arise between the Federal Court of Canada exercising its admiralty jurisdiction in rem, and the jurisdiction of the provincial superior courts over insolvency matters (a) Insolvency Law in Canada Insolvency law in Canada is set out primarily in two federal statutes, the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (“BIA”)1 and the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (“CCAA”).2 Jurisdiction in insolvency matters is given to the superior courts of the provinces.3 Like the U.S., among other jurisdictions, insolvency law in Canada differentiates between a stay of proceedings in liquidations, where the race among creditors is stopped to permit an orderly distribution of the company’s assets among creditors, and restructurings, in which the purpose of the stay is to permit the financially distressed company to survive as a going concern and avoid liquidating its assets. Liquidations are generally administered pursuant to the bankruptcy provisions of the BIA. Upon bankruptcy, there is an automatic stay of proceedings against the bankrupt. All of the assets of the bankrupt vest in a trustee in bankruptcy who is responsible for running a claims process and for realizing upon the bankrupt’s assets for distribution to creditors.
[Show full text]
CBA LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE for PROFESSIONAL WOMEN Presented by the CBA National Women Lawyers Forum
CBA LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE FOR PROFESSIONAL WOMEN Presented by the CBA National Women Lawyers Forum November 20-21, 2015♦The Fairmont Waterfront ♦Vancouver, BC List of speakers: - The Hon. Mme. Justice Rosalie Abella - Ritu Bhasin - Nicole Byres, QC - The Rt. Hon. Kim Campbell, PC, CC, OBC, QC - Linda Bray Chanow - Lauren Cook - The Hon. Kerry-Lynne Findlay, PC, QC - Catherine Gibson - Janet Grove - Kathleen Keilty - Patricia Lane - Lisa Martin - Charlene Ripley - Linda Robertson - Diane Ross - Lisa Skakun - Reva Seth - Andrea Verwey - Annelle Wilkins - Allison Wolf 1 Biographies The Hon. Mme. Justice Rosalie Abella Justice Abella was born in a Displaced Person's Camp in Stuttgart, Germany in 1946. Her family came to Canada as refugees in 1950. She attended the University of Toronto, where she earned a B.A. in 1967 and an LL.B. in 1970. She was called to the Ontario Bar in 1972 and practised civil and criminal litigation until 1976 when she was appointed to the Ontario Family Court. She was appointed to the Ontario Court of Appeal in 1992. Justice Abella was appointed to the Supreme Court of Canada in 2004 and is the first Jewish woman appointed to the Court. She was the sole Commissioner of the 1984 federal Royal Commission on Equality in Employment, creating the term and concept of "employment equity". The theories of "equality" and "discrimination" she developed in her report were adopted by the Supreme Court of Canada in its first decision dealing with equality rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1989. The report has been implemented by the governments of Canada, New Zealand, Northern Ireland and South Africa.
[Show full text]
Intervener Attorney-General-Of-Ontario.Pdf
Court File No. 3883738837 SUPREME COURT OF CANADA (ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL OF QUEBEC)QUEBÉC) BETWEEN:B E T W E E N: CONFÉRENCECONFERENCE DES JUGES DE LA COUR DU QUEBECQUÉBEC Appellant (Intervener)(Intervener) - and - CHIEF JUSTICE,JUSTICE, SENIOR ASSOCIATE CCHIEFHIEF JUSTICE, ASSOCIATEASSOCIATE CHIEF JUSTICEJUSTICE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT OF QUEBECQUEBEC Respondents (Interveners)(Interveners) [Style[Style of cause continues the next page]page] FACTUM OF THE INTERVENER, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO (Rules 42 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of CanadaCanada)) ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO ConstitutionalConstitutional Law Branch Supreme Advocacy LLP 720 Bay Street, 4th4th Floor 100-100- 340 Gilmour Street TorontoToronto,, ON M7A 2S9 Ottawa, Ontario K2P OR30R3 Sarah KraicerKraicer Daniel Huffaker Tel: (416) 326-3840326-3840 / (416) 894-5276894-5276 Marie-France-France Major Fax: (416) 326-4015326-4015 TTelephone:elephone: (613) 695-8855695-8855 Ext: 102 EmaEmail:il: [email protected]@ontario.ca FAX: (613) 695-8580695-8580 [email protected]@ontario.ca Email: [email protected] Counsel forfor the Intervener,Intervener, Agent forfor the Intervener,Intervener, the AttorneyAttorney the AttorneyAttorney General of Ontario General of Ontario ANDA N D BETWEEN:B E T W E E N: ATTORNEY GENERAL OF QUEBEC Appellant (Interveners)(Interveners) -and-- and - CHICHIEFEF JUSTICE,JUSTICE, SENIOR ASSOCIATE CHIEFCHIEF JUSTICE, ASSOCIATEASSOCIATE CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE SUPERSUPERIORIOR COURT OF QUEBECQUEBEC
[Show full text]