The Court’s Longest-Serving Justice
Appointed in October 2011, Justice Karakatsanis is the first Greek-Canadian to serve on the Supreme Court and is currently its longest-serving member. When asked about this distinction, she responds with characteristic humility: “It doesn’t always feel that way, but sometimes it does.”

A Diverse Career Path
Justice Karakatsanis’s career includes private practice in criminal, civil, and family law, followed by 15 years in senior leadership roles within the Ontario Public Service, including serving as Deputy Minister of Justice and Deputy Attorney General. This culminated in her appointment to the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in 2002 and the Court of Appeal for Ontario in 2010.

Hryniak v. Mauldin: A Call for Culture Change
In the landmark 2014 decision Hryniak v. Mauldin, Justice Karakatsanis wrote for a unanimous Court that “a shift in culture is required.” She championed the principle of proportionality, stating that “the best form for resolving a dispute is not always that with the most painstaking procedure.”

Her diverse experience informed this perspective: “I had witnessed firsthand the struggles of ordinary Canadians in accessing affordable and timely justice… Any kind of legal rule has to work at both a principled systemic level — it has to be coherent — but it also has to work on the ground.”

A decade later, “I still get judges and lawyers thanking me for the procedural flexibility.” The judgment itself states: “Without an effective means of enforcing rights, the rule of law is threatened. The justice system is there for people.”

R. v. Goldfinch: Truth-Seeking Free from Myths
In R. v. Goldfinch (2019), Justice Karakatsanis wrote for the majority that the label “friends with benefits” to describe a relationship could not be admitted simply as context, as it risked inviting the jury to engage in harmful myths about a victim’s sexual behavior.

“I love the criminal law,” she explains. “It raises fundamental questions about the kind of society we want to live in.” Sexual assault cases raise additional concerns about balancing an accused’s right to full answer and defence with “the dignity and privacy of a complainant.”

“The focus of every criminal trial is truth-seeking. There’s no room for myths, especially those based on a victim’s sexual behavior.”

Judicial Discretion as a Charter Safeguard
In her partial dissent in R. v. Boutilier (2017), Justice Karakatsanis raised concerns about dangerous offender legislation that removed judicial discretion by changing “may” to “shall,” potentially forcing judges to impose indefinite detention even when unwarranted.

“Judicial discretion can be a safety valve,” she explains. “It can be a way to preserve Parliament’s policy choice while still permitting a judge the discretion in an exceptional case where the decision would breach the individual’s constitutional rights.”

The concept of indefinite incarceration “not for what the person has done, but for what they might do” makes these cases “particularly challenging.”

Why Reasonable Judges Disagree
Justice Karakatsanis reflects on split decisions: “Charter cases do actually talk about values, fundamental values, and often they’re in tension with one another. I think it’s understandable that reasonable judges can come to different conclusions about how those values play out in a particular case.”

This is why transparency in reasoning is crucial: “We identify what are the principles, what are the values that we are taking into consideration and how is it that we balance them.”

Making the Court Accessible
Justice Karakatsanis identifies several ways the Supreme Court has become more accessible:

• Plain language decisions — “We write for the public, as well as for the lawyers and judges”
• Overview sections — Explaining what the case is about, what she decides, and why
• Generous intervener participation — “It not only makes our decisions better, but I think it also brings legitimacy to our work”

Beyond the Court, she chairs the National Action Committee on Access to Justice on Civil and Family Matters, now in its 13th year: “Access to justice is part of every conversation in justice. That’s real progress.”

A Person-Centred Vision of Justice
In French, Justice Karakatsanis shares her vision: “Pour transformer véritablement la culture juridique, il faut envisager la justice du point de vue de celles et ceux qui cherchent à résoudre leurs problèmes” — to truly transform legal culture, we must view justice from the perspective of those seeking to resolve their problems.

Charter Rights Belong to Everyone
Justice Karakatsanis offers a powerful reminder about Charter rights: “Unfortunately, the public often sees these rights as rights of criminals. That’s because many of them arise when someone is charged with an offense.”

She recalls telling high school students: “We only hear about the cases when the police do a search and they find the drugs. We never hear about the cases where a search and nothing is found… Those decisions define the rights and limit the police powers, not for those accused, but for everyone. For them, for me, for our friends, our family, our neighbors.”

The Legacy: Charter Jurisprudence and Just Rule of Law
Looking to the future, Justice Karakatsanis identifies two critical elements of the Court’s 150-year legacy:

1. Charter jurisprudence — “Rooted in going back to first principles. What are the interests that the Charter seeks to protect?” She quotes Justice Brian Dickson in Big M Drug Mart: “A free society is one which aims at equality with respect to the enjoyment of fundamental freedoms… founded in respect for the inherent dignity and inviolable rights of the human person.”
2. The rule of law as justice — “The rule of law is about more than just rules and more than about law. It’s about justice.” She invokes Martin Luther King Jr.: “The long arc of the moral universe must bend towards justice.”

Humility and Humanity
“I’ve been a judge for 23 years and I’ve come to believe that the most important judicial quality is humility and humanity. Because ultimately every law, every decision is about people.”

“La primauté du droit n’est pas seulement une question de règle ni une question de droit, mais c’est une question de justice.”