Abstract:In this article, the author examines the Supreme Court of Canada’s administrative law jurisprudence in 2016–18 to measure the level of deference that the Court afforded to administrative decision makers and to assess where the law may be headed next. The Court’s voting patterns indicate that its members have become increasingly polarized, moving away from the high level of unanimity that has historically prevailed in this area. Led by Justice Suzanne Côté, a minority of justices have frequently dissented or concurred in order to disagree on either the identification or the application of the standard of review. These justices have taken a more interventionist approach, voting to apply the correctness standard and to overturn administrative decisions at higher rates than the rest of the Court. This quantitative polarization reflects doctrinal disagreements on basic questions such as the extent to which administrative decision makers should be presumed to have expertise relative to the courts in interpreting their enabling statutes, whether there is any room in the standard of review analysis for either the concept of jurisdiction or a contextual inquiry, whether legislative supremacy or the rule of law should take precedence, and whether the standard of review analysis should be replaced with a single reasonableness standard. Looking ahead to the Court’s forthcoming reconsideration of Dunsmuir v New Brunswick, which approach prevails may be determined by Justice Michael Moldaver, whose voting pattern on the issue has been inconsistent, and the Court’s newest member, Justice Sheilah Martin, whose views on the standard of review analysis are not known.

中文翻译：

---

一所房子分裂：加拿大最高法院近期关于审查标准的判例

摘要：在本文中，作者考察了加拿大最高法院 2016-18 年的行政法判例，以衡量法院对行政决策者的尊重程度，并评估法律下一步可能走向何方。法院的投票模式表明，其成员变得越来越两极分化，偏离了该领域历来盛行的高度一致。在 Suzanne Côté 大法官的领导下，少数大法官经常反对或同意，以便在审查标准的确定或适用上存在分歧。这些法官采取了更干预主义的方法，投票适用正确性标准，并以比法院其他成员更高的比率推翻行政决定。这种数量上的两极分化反映了在基本问题上的学说分歧，例如行政决策者在解释其授权法规时应在多大程度上具有与法院相关的专业知识，审查分析的标准是否存在任何空间管辖权或背景调查，是否应优先考虑立法至上或法治，以及是否应将审查分析标准替换为单一的合理性标准。展望法院即将重新审议邓斯缪尔诉新不伦瑞克案，哪种方法占上风可能由迈克尔·摩尔达弗大法官决定，他在这个问题上的投票模式一直不一致，法院的最新成员希拉·马丁大法官，