The Rinfret Court was the period in the history of the Supreme Court of Canada from 1944 to 1954, during which Thibaudeau Rinfret served as Chief Justice of Canada. Rinfret succeeded Lyman Duff as Chief Justice following Duff's resignation, and remained in office until his own resignation on June 21, 1954.
The Rinfret Court coincided with the 1949 abolition of appeals to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, which had served as Canada's highest court of appeal and whose decisions in Canadian appeals bound all Canadian courts. The period of the Rinfret Court coincided with increasing criticism of the Privy Council and a growing favourable public awareness of the Supreme Court. Although the appeal was abolished in 1949, parties whose proceedings had begun before abolition could still seek leave to appeal to the Privy Council. The Privy Council issued its final decision in a Canadian appeal in 1959.
During this period, the Court wavered between judicial conservatism, which continued its role under the Privy Council, and a more liberal approach that recognized and protected civil liberties in cases such as R v Boucher (1950), and Saumur v Quebec (1953).
Membership
Under the Supreme Court Act, the Court was composed of seven justices, two of whom were allocated to Quebec under law, in recognition of the province's unique civil law system. Other appointments reflected an unwritten regional balance, with two justices from Ontario, two justices from Western Canada, and one justice from the Maritimes. In 1949, the Supreme Court was expanded to nine justices, with a requirement for three to be appointed from Quebec. The last position was allocated to Ontario under the unwritten regional balance convention.
Appointment of Chief Justice Rinfret
Chief Justice Lyman Duff retired on January 7, 1944, after 37 years on the bench. The next day, Prime Minister Mackenzie King appointed Thibaudeau Rinfret the ninth Chief Justice of Canada. Rinfret's selection generated little internal government controversy. Originally appointed to the Court in 1924, he was its senior puisne justice. He was also French-Canadian, a factor that could help reduce ethnic tensions that had grown during the Second World War. Although rumours circulated that James Ralston, King's Minister of National Defence, was interested in the position, Snell and Vaughan note that King was unwilling to interfere with his cabinet by appointing Ralston to the Court.
King nevertheless had reservations about Rinfret. In his diary, he expressed concern about Rinfret's age and frailty and did not expect him to remain Chief Justice for long. Rinfret was 64 years old when appointed.
Membership of the Court
Justices from the Duff Court who continued into the Rinfret Court included Henry Hague Davis and Patrick Kerwin of Ontario, Albert Hudson of Manitoba, Robert Taschereau of Quebec, and Ivan Rand of New Brunswick.
On October 3, 1944, Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie King appointed Roy Kellock of Ontario to the Court at the age of 50, filling the vacancy created by the death of Henry Hague Davis. Kellock was called to the bar in 1920, practised in private law in Toronto as litigation counsel, and was appointed to the Ontario Court of Appeal two years earlier in 1942.
On October 6, 1944, Prime Minister King appointed James Wilfred Estey of Saskatchewan to the Court at the age of 54, filling the western Canadian vacancy created by the retirement of Lyman Duff. Estey was educated at the University of New Brunswick and Harvard Law School, and moved to Saskatchewan in 1915. He taught economics and law at the University of Saskatchewan for 10 years, was called to the bar in 1917, and later held several litigation-related positions, including roles in private practice, as assistant to the local Crown attorney, and as local agent for the provincial attorney general. Estey was elected to the Legislative Assembly of Saskatchewan as a Liberal in 1934 and served in cabinet as Minister of Education and Attorney General in the Gardiner and Patterson governments. Snell and Vaughan note that Estey's appointment followed King's patronage blueprint for Court appointments, prior judicial experience was not required, while service to the Liberal Party and influential political connections were important factors.
The western vacancy filled by Estey was contested by representatives from British Columbia, Alberta, and Saskatchewan. Calls from British Columbia were largely ignored because Duff had represented that province on the Court for over 37 years. Senator Aristide Blais led the Alberta campaign, writing personally to King that Alberta had never had a Supreme Court justice and pointing to the province's growing population and economic importance. Senator Blais appealed to King's "sense of equity...to correct a situation which puts Alberta in a condition of inferiority among the other provinces." The consensus Alberta candidate was Supreme Court of Alberta justice Frank C. Ford. However, Alberta lacked the same influence in King's cabinet and the Liberal Party as Saskatchewan. Minister of Agriculture James Garfield Gardiner led the Saskatchewan campaign with other members of parliament, and proposed Estey, Thomas Clayton Davis, and Chief Justice of Saskatchewan William Melville Martin.
On June 3, 1947, Prime Minister King appointed Charles Holland Locke of British Columbia to the Court at the age of 59, filling the vacancy created by Albert Hudson's death on January 6, 1947. He was called to the bar in 1910 in Manitoba, and moved to Vancouver in 1928 where he was active in the provincial bar and the Progressive Conservative party. Locke was the last member of the Court to have read law rather than receive legal training at a university. King struggled to find a qualified candidate for the position, having offered the position to Sherwood Lett, and others who declined. King also considered appointing Louis St. Laurent and James Lorimer Ilsley despite not being from Western Canada.
On December 22, 1949, Prime Minister St. Laurent appointed John Robert Cartwright of Ontario to the Court at the age of 54, filling one of the newly created positions on the Court. He served in the First World War as an aide-de-camp to three generals. He was called to the bar in 1920 and practised in Toronto. He also served as government counsel to the Royal Commission on Spying Activities in Canada. Cartwright had no judicial experience when appointed, but was a highly respected lawyer and bencher on the Law Society of Upper Canada.
On December 22, 1949, Prime Minister St. Laurent appointed Gérald Fauteux of Quebec to the Court at the age of 49, filling one of the newly created positions on the Court. He studied at the Université de Montréal and practised in Montreal with his uncle Honoré Mercier Jr.. From 1929 to 1936, he was Crown Prosecutor for Montreal, and in 1939 he became Chief Crown Prosecutor of the province of Quebec. In 1947 he was appointed to the Quebec Superior Court.
Retirement of Chief Justice Rinfret
On June 21, 1954, Chief Justice Rinfret reached the mandatory retirement age of 75 and stepped down from the Supreme Court. Prime Minister Louis St. Laurent appointed Patrick Kerwin, the senior puisne justice, as the next Chief Justice of Canada on July 1, 1954. This appointment came after consultation with former Chief Justice Lyman Duff. Justice Rinfret's Quebec seat on the Court was filled by St. Laurent cabinet member Douglas Abbott.
Timeline
Other branches of government
The Rinfret Court began during the 19th Canadian Parliament, under a majority government led by Liberal Party, led by former Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie King.
The Court's tenure overlapped with three general elections. In the 1945 election, King's Liberals was elected to another majority government. King stepped down in 1948 and Louis St. Laurent took over the Liberal Party and became Prime Minister. St. Laurent secured a majority government in the 1949 election; and a weaker majority in the 1953 election.
Relationship with the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council
From 1867 to 1949, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council served as the highest court of appeal in Canada, and its decisions on Canadian appeals were binding on all Canadian courts. After the creation of the Supreme Court of Canada, parties could still—if both consented—appeal directly from a provincial court of appeal to the Judicial Committee, bypassing the Supreme Court. This became common practice. By 1900, the Privy Council had become dominant in Canadian jurisprudence, often deciding cases with "little or no restraint or respect" for the decisions of the Canadian courts from which the appeals originated. Between 1895 and 1954, there was always at least one Canadian on the Privy Council, all of whom were appointed from the Supreme Court. Snell and Vaughan note that Canadian membership on the Privy Council was only significant for tightening the legal and judicial structure of the British Empire and making its authority over Canada more palatable to Canadians.
Growing nationalist sentiment following the First World War into the 1930s increased public support for abolishing appeals to the Privy Council. Proponents of the appeal noted the intellectual strength of the Privy Council and its neutral position on contentious Canadian issues. Critics such as Frank Scott criticized the Privy Council for being "ignorant of the Canadian environment," and his study noted that the Supreme Court gave similar and even favourable treatment to minority groups compared to the Privy Council. In 1939, Conservative Member of Parliament Charles Cahan introduced a private members bill to abolish appeals to the Privy Council. Justice Minister Ernest Lapointe referred the bill to the Supreme Court, which held by a 4–2 decision that Parliament had the authority to abolish the appeal, with each justice writing individual reasons. The Second World War delayed the appeal to the Privy Council until 1946. Lord Jowitt largely relied on the reasons of Chief Justice Duff that abolishing the appeal was an element of self-government under the Statute of Westminster 1931, in holding that Parliament had the authority to terminate the appeal.
Termination of appeals to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council took considerable time. The issue coincided with 1945 negotiations between the federal government and the provinces over social security and taxation. Snell and Vaughan note that the delay likely reflected a desire to avoid provoking the provincial governments during those negotiations. Despite the desire to abolish the appeal, Chief Justice Rinfret was appointed to the Privy Council in 1947, following established practice. King's cabinet and the Liberal Party had little unity on the issue. Justice Minister James Lorimer Ilsley supported termination, while King worried that abolition would alienate Anglo-Canadians. St. Laurent did not believe Quebec Liberals would support abolishing appeals on constitutional questions involving the division of powers. King put the issue before the Liberal convention in August 1948, which adopted a resolution supporting complete termination. King retired, and Liberal leader St. Laurent pledged to abolish the appeal after the 1949 election. Parliament later passed legislation abolishing appeals to the Privy Council and denying any appeal based on the royal prerogative or any United Kingdom statute, which received royal assent on December 10, 1949.
Reference Re Persons of Japanese Race (1946): on the constitutionality of deportation orders for Canadian citizens of Japanese descent. In a 5–2 decision, the Supreme Court upheld the validity of the deportation orders, except those applying to the wives and children of deportees. At the Privy Council, Lord Wright held that the entire scheme was valid for the reasons given by Justices Rinfret, Kerwin, and Taschereau.