Fitzpatrick Court


The Fitzpatrick Court was the period in the history of the Supreme Court of Canada from 1906 to 1918, during which Charles Fitzpatrick served as Chief Justice of Canada. Fitzpatrick succeeded Henri Elzéar Taschereau as Chief Justice after the latter's resignation, and held the position until his retirement on October 20, 1918.
The Fitzpatrick Court, much like all iterations of the Supreme Court prior to 1949, was largely overshadowed by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, which served as the highest court of appeal in Canada, and whose decisions on Canadian appeals were binding on all Canadian courts.
The Fitzpatrick Court continued to face many of the same criticisms as its predecessors, the Ritchie Court, Strong Court and Taschereau Court, including the concerns about the conduct of its justices and the partisan nature of Prime Minister Wilfrid Laurier's appointments, which by 1911 accounted for the entire bench. The Court also became increasingly political, with justices providing advice and taking on quasi-judicial roles for both the Laurier and Borden governments.

Membership

The Supreme Court Act, 1875 established the Supreme Court of Canada, composed of six justices, two of whom were allocated to Quebec under law, in recognition of the province's unique civil law system. Early appointments to the Court reflected an unwritten regional balance, with two justices from Ontario and two from the Maritimes. Western Canada was not represented until the early 1900s.
Chief Justice Henri-Elzéar Taschereau resigned on May 2, 1906, at the age of 69. He claimed his resignation was a condition of his 1904 appointment to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. He remained in office until the Laurier government named a successor. By his retirement, Taschereau had served 44 years as a judge, including over 27 years on the Supreme Court. In his final years, his health and energy had declined.
Charles Fitzpatrick was appointed Chief Justice of Canada by Prime Minister Laurier on June 4, 1906. An Anglo-Quebecer and Catholic, he had served as a Liberal Member of Parliament and Minister of Justice. In his legal career, he worked as both Crown counsel and criminal defence, representing several prominent clients, including Louis Riel, Thomas McGreevy, and Honoré Mercier. Fitzpatrick was the first person since William Buell Richards to be appointed directly to the position of Chief Justice, and the only one to do so without prior judicial experience. Contemporary public reaction was positive, likely due to his prominent legal work earlier in his career.
Justices from the Taschereau Court who continued into the Fitzpatrick Court included Robert Sedgewick of Ontario, Désiré Girouard of Quebec, Louis Henry Davies of Prince Edward Island, John Idington of Ontario, and James Maclennan of Ontario.
On September 27, 1906, Wilfrid Laurier appointed Lyman Duff of British Columbia to the Court following the death of Justice Sedgewick on August 4, 1906. Duff, then 41, was appointed from the Supreme Court of British Columbia, and was the first appointment from British Columbia. An active Liberal in Victoria, he had served as junior counsel on the Alaska Boundary Commission, and was a justice of the British Columbia Court for two years before his appointment. Duff's appointment was well received by the legal community due to his good reputation and name recognition across Canada. Duff went on to become the longest serving justice in the Court's history, serving for over 37 years, including 10 years as Chief Justice. Historians Snell and Vaughan note that by the 1980s, Duff was the "most famous justice in the history of the ."
On February 23, 1909, Laurier appointed Francis Alexander Anglin of Ontario after Justice Maclennan's retirement on February 13. Anglin had joined the High Court of Justice of Ontario in 1904 after 16 years in corporate and commercial practice. Considered a "scientific" lawyer, he had written several articles and a book before his appointment.
On August 11, 1911, Laurier appointed Louis-Philippe Brodeur of Quebec after the death of Justice Girouard on March 22. Brodeur, a Liberal MP since 1891, had served as Speaker of the House of Commons of Canada and held minor cabinet roles in the Laurier government, including Minister of the Naval Service and Marine and Fisheries. He was well liked and a close friend of Laurier, though described as having shown "no great skill in politics or law."
By 1912, with Girouard's retirement, the entire Court consisted of Laurier appointees. His government followed two contrasting approaches to appointments: some, such as Justices Armour, Killam, Duff, and Anglin, were chosen for their skill and merit; others were patronage appointments to reward Liberals, often with limited judicial or legal experience. Historians Snell and Vaughan note that justices such as Davies, Fitzpatrick, and Brodeur, who came from elected office, lacked the well-developed legal reasoning expected of judges and did not "make as useful a contribution to the law" as their more qualified colleagues.

Timeline

Other branches of government

The Fitzpatrick Court began during the 10th Canadian Parliament, under a majority government led by Liberal Prime Minister Wilfrid Laurier.
The Court's tenure overlapped with three general elections. In 1908, the Liberal Party was re-elected with a majority government. In 1911, the Conservative Party, led by Robert Borden, won a majority and formed the government. In the contested 1917 election, which saw the Liberal and Conservative parties split into two coalitions, Robert Borden remained Prime Minister when his Unionist government elected with a strong majority.

Relationship with the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council

From 1867 to 1949, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council served as the highest court of appeal in Canada, and its decisions on Canadian appeals were binding on all Canadian courts. After the creation of the Supreme Court of Canada, parties could still—if both consented—appeal directly from a provincial court of appeal to the Judicial Committee, bypassing the Supreme Court. This became common practice. By 1900, the Privy Council had become dominant in Canadian jurisprudence, often deciding cases with "little or no restraint or respect" for the decisions of the Canadian courts from which the appeals originated. By the early 20th century, it was regarded as a normal part of the Canadian legal system, no longer limited to exceptional cases, a point the Committee itself stressed when urging Canadian lawyers to bring forward only cases of significance or importance.
In the early 1900s, public opinion began to turn against the Privy Council. Bushnell notes that national pride and imperial resentment grew in the aftermath of the Alaska Boundary Dispute and the Boer War. Criticism of the Privy Council began to appear in the press, prompting the legal profession to respond in its own journals. Liberal-linked media advocated restricting the appeal, while Conservative-linked media argued for its retention. Former Supreme Court justice Wallace Nesbitt published an article broadly supporting the council with romantic language describing the broad jurisdiction of the Court. When the Privy Council overturned the Street Railway Case, Toronto newspapers criticized it as being out of touch with Canadian values.
In 1895, the Parliament of the United Kingdom amended the Judicial Committee's constituting documents to allow the Queen to summon a limited number of colonial justices. In 1909, Chief Justice Fitzpatrick was appointed to the Imperial Privy Council, giving him the right to sit on the Judicial Committee alongside former Chief Justice Henri-Elzéar Taschereau. His appointment was delayed because the maximum number of appointments from Canada was two, and former Chief Justice of Samuel Henry Strong refused to resign despite no longer attending sessions.
Between 1903 and 1913, 14.5 per cent of all Supreme Court decisions were appealed to the Privy Council, a much higher rate than under the Strong Court, which had only 5.1 per cent appealed.
  • The Street Railway Case : on construing a contract and territorial limits. Lord Collins overturned the decision of the Supreme Court.
  • The Annuities Case : on whether the federal or provincial government is liable for Treaty 3 annuity payments. Canada claimed Ontario was required to make Treaty annuity payments. Lord Loreburn upheld the Supreme Court's decision, holding that the Treaty was between the federal Crown and Ojibway, and that the that the federal and provincial governments "were separately invested by the Crown with its rights and responsibilities as treaty maker and as owner respectively."

    Rulings of the Court

The Fitzpatrick Court continued the growth in the number of appeals heard by the Court from the Taschereau Court era, and a growing efficiency of the Court to handle those appeals.
  • Iredale v Loudon : on adverse possession. A 3–2 majority of the Court held that Iredale acquired title to a second floor room of a building, but did not acquire a proprietary right to the supports in the building, rejecting an injunction preventing the demolition of the building.
  • Stuart v Bank of Montreal : on stare decisis. A 4–1 majority of the Court adopted a formalistic approach to stare decisis, choosing to be bound by previous decisions despite the grounds available to distinguish the decision.
  • In re References by Governor-General in Council : on the validity of the reference question authority. A 5–1 majority upheld the validity of the reference question authority, with all justices providing separate reasons. The only common element was that reference opinions were advisory in nature and not binding on any courts. The decision was upheld by the Privy Council.
  • In Re Marriage Laws : on solemnization of marriage and the Ne Temere
Decree. A 4–1 majority of the Court held that the provincial power to solemnize marriage under section 92 of the Constitution Act, 1867, was broad in scope, absolute, and meant to cover the entire contract. The composition of the Court at the time was evenly split, 3–3 between Protestants and Roman Catholics.
  • In Re Gray : on the constitutionality of Henry VIII Clauses. Gray's exemption to conscription was cancelled by order-in-council, he challenged his detention on the ground Parliament's delegation of legislative powers to Cabinet was ultra vires. The Court held a special session to hear the case. The 4–2 majority held that the legislature can delegate its legislative powers.