An Unexpected Journey
“I never, in my wildest dream, thought that one day I would be appointed to the Supreme Court of Canada. Even less to be appointed as Chief Justice of Canada. Never.” Richard Wagner practised law in Montréal from 1980 to 2004, focusing on professional liability, commercial litigation, and class actions. He appeared before all levels of courts in Quebec, the Federal Court, and the Supreme Court of Canada.

His judicial career began with an appointment to the Quebec Superior Court in 2004, followed by the Court of Appeal in 2011. On October 5, 2012, he was appointed Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada, and on December 18, 2017, he was sworn in as Chief Justice.

The Court’s Transformation Since 1982
The Supreme Court has evolved considerably over 150 years. Before 1949, appeals could still be taken to London; that year, the Supreme Court became Canada’s court of last resort. But the fundamental transformation came with the adoption of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1982.

“At that moment, the Court became the guardian of the Charter. Parliament, the elected representatives, gave judges the mandate to interpret what freedom of expression means, what the right to equality means. This is an exceedingly important mandate that has modified the mosaic of Canadian society since 1982.”

Vavilov: Clarifying Administrative Law
When asked about landmark decisions, the Chief Justice highlights Vavilov (2019), a case he championed. Administrative law governs how appellate courts review decisions by first-instance decision-makers in immigration, regulatory bodies, and quasi-judicial organizations. “This is where Canadian citizens have the most interaction. This is where they will appear for the first time, most often.”

Previous jurisprudence, particularly Dunsmuir, had been criticized for lacking clarity. “When I became Chief Justice in 2017, one of the first things I did was tell my colleagues: we need to settle this. We need to clarify it.”

The Court took an unprecedented approach: when granting leave to appeal, it invited all interested parties to intervene. Two days of hearings followed, with an amicus curiae appointed by the Court. “We worked very hard and arrived at the Vavilov decision, which greatly clarified the circumstances in which an appellate court can intervene. This is a matter of access to justice.”

The Pandemic as an Agent of Change
Chief Justice Wagner co-chaired the Action Committee on the Administration of Justice in Response to COVID-19 with the Minister of Justice. “It was the first time that the judiciary and the executive and legislative branches worked together while respecting the separation of powers.”

The committee met monthly by videoconference, developing guidelines to help courts reopen and maintain access to justice. Key innovations included allowing accused persons to appear via videoconference and streaming the telewarrant process. “The Supreme Court has had this technology since 1987, but nobody was using it because every lawyer in Canada wanted to come here in person.”

The Chief Justice hopes these technological tools will continue to be used: “Technology will be more and more used in the future to support access to justice.”

The Living Tree Doctrine
The Constitution must be interpreted according to the “living tree” doctrine, adapting to society’s evolution. The Chief Justice illustrates this with medical assistance in dying: in Rodriguez (1993), the Court upheld Criminal Code provisions prohibiting it by a 5-4 margin. In Carter (2016), a unanimous Court reversed that decision.

“We can overturn a precedent when there is a fundamental change in society, an evolution of expectations, or an evolution of science in health matters.” In Carter, there was a year of evidence before the trial judge establishing the evolution of medicine in this area.

However, reversing precedent requires “very particular circumstances. We cannot do it for just any reason. Citizens need permanence, stability in jurisprudence. They must know what their rights and obligations are.”

Building Public Trust
“Courts need public trust. If citizens no longer have confidence in their institutions, particularly in the courts, it’s the beginning of the end. But trust must be earned. It cannot be imposed.”

The Chief Justice has championed several initiatives to make the Court more accessible:

• Case in Brief: Plain-language, one-page summaries of decisions, avoiding scientific language and Latin expressions
• Annual Review: Explaining the Court’s work over the past year and its direction
• Sittings outside Ottawa: The full Court heard cases in Quebec City (2019) and Winnipeg (2022)
• 150th Anniversary Tour: The Chief Justice and two colleagues visited five regions (Victoria, Moncton, Yellowknife, Sherbrooke, Thunder Bay) to meet the public, law students, local judiciary, and Indigenous communities

“People don’t always have to agree with our decisions, but they should accept the process by which those decisions are rendered.”

Access to Justice: Beyond Government Funding
“For many years, governments did not invest enough in the justice system. They invested in health, education—and that is perfect. But the justice system was always the ‘parent pauvre’ of society.” This led to problems that ultimately forced the Court to release the Jordan decision on trial delays.

While governments must invest more, the Chief Justice believes solutions must go further: “We have to think outside the box. Pro bono work is a great tool to improve access to justice. Legal aid must be increased. But people should not expect only increases in funding to realize better access to justice.”

Landmark Decisions for Access to Justice
The Chief Justice highlights several decisions:

• Stinchcombe (1991) — Established the Crown’s duty to disclose all relevant evidence, ensuring full defence for accused persons
• Burns (2001) — Canada cannot extradite a person if they face the death penalty in the requesting country
• Council of Canadians with Disabilities (2022) — Recognized that non-profit organizations can represent vulnerable persons in court proceedings, a major development in Canadian law
• Language Rights — Including a decision the Chief Justice authored regarding francophone minority education rights in British Columbia, heard during the Winnipeg sitting

Looking to the Future
Asked about challenges ahead—artificial intelligence, global migration, social and political polarization—the Chief Justice responds: “The Court will continue to assume its responsibility to interpret the law. And always keep in mind that justice is not just a service, it’s a human need.”

“When the Court takes up cases, there is a legal issue to be decided, but it also implies moral and societal aspects. We are mindful of that. I believe that since 1982, the Court has shown—and will continue to demonstrate—that it will be available whenever a legal battle happens dealing with legal, moral, and societal issues.”