Bill C-15 - Budget Implementation Act, No. 1

Via email: LCJC@sen.parl.gc.ca

The Honourable David M. Arnot
Chair, Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs (LCJC)
Senate of Canada
Ottawa ON K1A 0A6

Dear Senator Arnot:

Re: Bill C-15 - Budget Implementation Act, No. 1

We are writing on behalf of the Family Law Section and Judicial Issues Subcommittee of the Canadian Bar Association (CBA Sections) regarding Bill C-15, the Budget Implementation Act, No. 1, specifically Division 30 of Part 5. We thank the Senate for the opportunity to comment, and we specifically express our support for the reallocation of judges to unified family courts (UFCs), as set out in Division 30.

The CBA is a national association of over 40,000 members, including lawyers, law students, notaries and academics. Our mandate includes promoting the rule of law, improving access to justice and advocating for effective law reform. The Family Law Section consists of Family Law specialists from all regions of Canada who provide expertise on substantive and practical issues in Family Law. The Judicial Issues Subcommittee addresses policy issues relating to judicial appointments, compensation, discipline
and independence.

Support for expansion of Unified Family Courts (UFCs)

The CBA Sections strongly supports the amendments in Division 30, which allocate judicial resources to Ontario through eight UFC positions as well as two Ontario Court of Appeal positions.¹ The CBA Family Law Section has long maintained that expanding UFCs by authorizing additional judicial appointments and allocating those positions to UFCs is essential to improving access to justice for families and to reducing delays in our civil and criminal court systems across Canada.² A CBA resolution in 2005 specifically called for the expansion of UFCs to eliminate “the fragmented family law jurisdiction, increase consistency in family law issues, and facilitate integration of services for families who are separating”.³

The complexities of Family Law

Family law legislation is complex because it is applied across multiple court systems. Divorce and property matters fall under the jurisdiction of the superior courts, while child protection proceedings and many parenting disputes are heard in provincial family courts. This multi-layered framework frequently results in jurisdictional confusion, increased costs, and bifurcated processes. Cases may be filed in the wrong court, or issues already determined in one court may be mistakenly raised in another. As a result, families often must navigate more than one court, a challenge that becomes even greater when criminal allegations or immigration matters are also involved.

The prevalence of family violence

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Canadians were confronted with alarming data showing that 44% of women, about 6.2 million people, will experience family violence in their lifetime. ⁴ The federal government amended the Divorce Act ⁵, prompting courts, including the Supreme Court of Canada, to guide legal advisors and parents to consider family violence and safety in parenting plans and to recognize the evidentiary challenges inherent in these cases.⁶

Rising income and housing insecurity further exacerbate family instability and the potential for family violence. The structure and ease of use of UFCs provide support for families in transition and in need of protection. A specialized judge who hears cases in a UFC system is necessary for the justice system to be responsive to these complex and varied needs.

Delays in the judicial system

The appointment of additional superior court judges to UFCs is essential to meeting long-standing recommendations from national committees and organizations that work with families.⁷ The complexity and volume of civil, family, and criminal cases continue to grow, placing significant strain on court resources—pressure that has intensified under the strict timelines required by R. v. Jordan.⁸

According to Statistics Canada, civil, family, and criminal caseloads continue to climb.⁹ In 2022–23, courts managed 768,615 active civil cases (a 3% increase) and 252,516 active family cases (a 2.7% increase, with nearly half newly filed). Criminal cases rose by 4.2% in 2023–24. These pressures, combined with the strict timelines required by R. v. Jordan, are overwhelming courts nationwide. The consequences are serious: in 2022–23, one in seven sexual assault cases was stayed or withdrawn because it exceeded Jordan timelines.¹⁰

This growing demand underscores the urgent need to reallocate family matters to a specialized forum. A UFC removes family law cases from general superior and provincial courts, freeing judicial time and resources that can be redirected to other civil and criminal matters.

The benefits of UFCs

UFCs offer distinct procedures and a specialized bench with deep expertise in family law.¹¹ They are designed to meet the needs of family law litigants by prioritizing access to dispute resolution, promoting early case resolution, and reducing the confusion created by the current fragmented system. Their central advantage is a single court that provides a full range of family-specific services grounded in family law legislation, leading to more predictable outcomes and greater trust in the process. UFCs also recognize the diverse backgrounds and experiences of families, many of whom are unrepresented¹² or face language and cultural barriers. These UFCs uphold the human rights of children, including their right to participate in decisions affecting their care¹³. The specific features of UFCs are commendable.¹⁴

In summary, the CBA Sections believe that the increase in UFC judges to allow expansion of UFCs, as proposed in Bill C-15, is a vital step toward improving access to justice for families, streamlining the family law process, and reducing delays across both civil and criminal courts. The creation of new UFCs will enable family and non-family matters to reach resolution more quickly. We also welcome the government’s commitment, as reflected in the budget, to advancing gender balance and diversity in federal judicial appointments, consistent with our recent submission to the Judicial Compensation and Benefits Commission. More broadly, we commend the government for recognizing the importance of UFCs as essential to the administration of justice and restoring public confidence in our legal institutions. The proposed amendments to the Judges Act in Bill C-15 represent an important first step towards addressing chronic under-resourcing in Canada’s justice system and in prioritizing families and children.

We hope our comments are helpful. TheCBA Sections are available to provide further feedback or assistance as required.

Yours truly,

(original letter signed by Yasmin Khaliq for Tracy C. Brown and Roselle P. Wu)

End notes