Clear The Court

"An increasing number of qualified private practitioners no longer view a judicial appointment, considering its attendant responsibilities and benefits, as attractive in light of the resulting significant reduction in income."

"Despite best efforts, I have often found myself unable to persuade qualified potential candidates to apply for judicial appointments."

"A routinely cited reason for this lack of interest is the combination of the heavy workload of superior court judges and the perceived lack of commensurate pay for that work."

Ontario Superior Court Chief Justice Geoffrey Morawetz 

The 'Truth' statue graces the entrance of the judicial precinct in Ottawa, as the Peace Tower is seen in the background. (Sean Kilpatrick/Canadian Press)

 

The $415,000 salary that federally appointed judges receive is inadequate to the calls made upon the justices serving in Canada's federal court system. A $60,000 addition would be the balm to make that burden more acceptable to the point where the best and brightest in Canada's members of the legal profession might feel prepared to leave private or corporate law to deign to accept prestigious judicial appointments. For months a commission to review federally appointed judges' compensation has been a battleground between the federal government and the judiciary.

 

An annual salary of $414,900 simply does not adequately express appreciation for the graceful acceptance of such a public office of high stature of lawyers evidently earning in excess of a half-million dollars a year. And as such, accepting a judicial appointment appears beneath the dignity of talented lawyers. Top legal applicants are therefore, according to the argument, reluctant to fill vacancies in provincial superior and appellate courts, or alternately, federal courts. 

 

According to judges' associations a modest $60,000 top-up in annual salaries for Canadian justices is required to maintain the appeal of the bench for a judiciary increasingly struggling to attract "outstanding candidates" from the private sector in view of a gap in pay discrepancy between lawyers and judges. The federal government demurs; the "unprecedented" raise request is out of line given that the current salary and benefits -- inclusive of "one of the best retirement plans in Canada" -- leaves the bench an attractive option for qualified candidates.

 

"Not only does this increase have no legal basis, but it is insensitive to the current economic challenges of Canadians", responded government lawyers in submissions to the commission. The Canadian Judicial Council and the Canadian Superior Courts Judges Association painted a portrait of the judiciary in a joint submission: overworked judges, concerning trend of languishing vacancies and diminishing interest in joining the beach from "outstanding" lawyers in private practice.

 

A "worrisome" ten percent drop in proportion of appointees to the bench from private practice between 1990 and 2024, the judges highlighted in their case. Due to a "persistent, dramatic" 67 percent gap (valued at $300,000 in 2022) between total compensation and earnings of lawyers as compared to judges at the75th percentile. 

 

The government views the calls as nonsense; claims that judges are underpaid and there is a struggle to attract top qualify candidates to the bench as federal magistrates. The "unprecedented" raise request is deemed out of line given judges' current compensation guarantees financial security; recommending salaries remain indexed at a maximum of 14 percent over four years. 

 

Federally appointed judges say their $415,000 salary needs a $60,000 bump to keep the job attractive to top legal applicants. The government says: not in this economy.