Judicial review stands as one of the most important safeguards available to Canadians who find themselves on the receiving end of government decisions that affect their livelihoods, their businesses, and their operations. At its core, judicial review is the process by which a court examines a decision made by an administrative body—such as a licensing board, a regulatory agency, a municipal government, or a tribunal—to determine whether that decision was made lawfully and reasonably. This mechanism exists because Canadian law recognizes that while Parliament and provincial legislatures delegate significant decision-making power to administrative bodies, those bodies must exercise that power within certain boundaries. When they exceed those boundaries, or when they exercise their power in ways that are fundamentally unfair or unreasonable, the courts can intervene.
The concept of judicial review is rooted in the constitutional principle that courts have inherent supervisory jurisdiction over administrative decision-makers. This means that regardless of what a statute says about the finality of an administrative decision, the superior courts retain the authority to review that decision for legality. This principle flows from section 96 of the Constitution Act, 1867, which establishes the superior courts of the provinces and, by implication, protects their core supervisory function. The Federal Court exercises similar jurisdiction over federal administrative bodies by virtue of the Federal Courts Act. Understanding this constitutional foundation helps explain why judicial review is available even when a statute appears to prevent it—the power of courts to ensure administrative bodies act within their legal authority cannot be entirely ousted by legislation.