The respondents, who were non-sitting justices of the peace, challenged the constitutionality of legislative amendments that required all justices of the peace exercising judicial functions to meet new qualifications set by an independent Judicial Council.
The respondents did not meet these qualifications and were removed from office, though offered administrative positions.
The Supreme Court of Canada held that while the principle of judicial independence applied to their office, the legislative removal did not violate their security of tenure.
The reforms were a good faith effort to improve the qualifications and independence of the office, and thus the removal was not arbitrary.
