Welcome to Cases That Should Have Gone to the Supreme Court of Canada, But Didn’t! This week, lawyer Kyla Lee discusses judicial independence.
Acumen Law Corporation lawyer Kyla Lee gives her take on a made-in-Canada court case each week and discusses why these cases should have been heard by Canada’s highest court: the Supreme Court of Canada.
The British Columbia Review Board Commissioner is appointed and paid a particular salary. This salary is determined on the basis of actions taken by the government. This means that any decisions made about the commissioner’s salary are reviewable on judicial review.
The commissioner filed for judicial review on the basis that his salary did not meet the necessary expectations to protect him from potential influence.
The court had to consider the question of whether or not he, acting as the commissioner of a review board, was entitled to the constitutional principle of judicial independence. They decided that he did not.
This case raises important issues because if judicial independence and appropriate salaries to prevent bias and bribery don’t exist for people who are dealing with administrative tribunals and making administrative decisions, then is deligating those decision making powers to those individuals exposing our justice system for potential abuse?
Watch the video for more.