I think everybody in the room would hope that the answer would be “never”, because hopefully we don't have judicial misconduct that needs to be considered at a level of national importance. The reality is that the Supreme Court of Canada has limited time available to it, and it is selective about the cases it must allocate that time to. That's why the leave process is there. One of the other panellists provided some information earlier about some statistics around the number of cases where leave is sought, and where leave is actually granted.
Having a very high bar at the Supreme Court of Canada does support the fairness of the process, because it creates that ultimate authority. The Supreme Court of Canada is that ultimate judicial authority where a case could end up, should it be justified, should it be of such substantial importance that the Supreme Court of Canada ought to contribute its wisdom to the case.
Prior to that being granted, the levels of reviews contained in the process set out in Bill C-9 provide a robust and significant opportunity for all issues to be heard and adjudicated fairly, in the position of the CBA.