Robert C. Maybank

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.

The Province of Alberta introduced a new school funding scheme that pooled all revenues in a central fund and distributed them on a per-student basis.

Separate school boards, but not public school boards, were permitted to opt out of the scheme and continue raising funds directly from ratepayers.

The appellants challenged the scheme, arguing it violated a constitutional right to reasonable autonomy, discriminated against public school boards, and violated a principle of mirror equality.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, holding that school boards do not have a constitutional right to reasonable autonomy, the funding scheme does not discriminate against public school boards as it meets a standard of fairness, and the constitutional provisions do not guarantee mirror equality between public and separate school boards.