Article content

When the Supreme Court of Canada decides a question, its job is to say what the law is.

When a majority of judges agree on the answer – but disagree on the supporting reasons – mixed messaging yields a muddle.

We apologize, but this video has failed to load.

tap here to see other videos from our team. Try refreshing your browser, or Marchant: Should Canada's Supreme Court dampen the internal dissent? Back to video

Different supporting opinions of judges are perversely called “concurring,” when they are in fact disagreeing in the most important part of the decision, the majority vote. Judges may also disagree on the answer: those are called “dissenting” opinions.

In 2018, the court produced 21 unanimous decisions; 21 with a majority opinion and dissents; and 16 where the majority was split into “concurring” factions.

A 2018 question before the court was: Must Parliament consult with Aboriginal peoples before passing legislation that affects them? Although all judges said the answer was “no,” three had one set of reasons, three another, two took a third view, and one a fourth approach – with some comments openly critical of a colleague.