Provincial Court of New Brunswick, Canada

Introduction: Provincial Courts
At the bottom of the Canadian Judicial hierarchy are the courts typically described as provincial courts. These courts are generally divided within each province into various divisions defined by the subject matter of their respective jurisdictions; hence, one usually finds a Traffic Division, a Small Claims Division, a Family Division called, a Criminal Division, and so on.

In the Province of New Brunswick, these courts divided into various divisions defined by the subject matter of their respective jurisdictions;

What may be called Criminal Division, in other provinces is called Provincial Court, in the Province of New Brunswick:  The Provincial Court is the entry point for all persons charged with offences under the Criminal Code or other federal or provincial legislation such as Provincial Offences Procedure Act, SNB 1987, c P-22.1,

What may be called Traffic Division in other provinces is called Provincial Court, in the Province of New Brunswick: Provincial Court deals with all Municipal Bylaw matters as well as other ticketing procedures.  

In the Province of New Brunswick: The Provincial Court has jurisdiction to try almost all indictable offences involving adult accused (murder being the main exception), all offences involving youths under the Youth Criminal Justice Act (ages 12 to 18), and all summary conviction offences for both adults and youths. Even in indictable matters where the accused person has an election or choice to be tried in the Court of Queen's Bench by a judge sitting with or without a jury, the Provincial Court may first be required to hold a preliminary inquiry.

In the Province of New Brunswick: Provincial Court judges also receive Informations (the documents which contain charges), issue Search Warrants, Summonses, and Subpoenas, Warrants of Arrest, and conduct Bail Hearings of accused persons who appear before the Court in custody, in addition to conducting regular Court sittings on a daily basis. 

In the Province of New Brunswick: Provincial Court judges also hold weekend “Remand Court” to allow persons who have been arrested by the police to be brought before a judge within 24 hours. 

In the Province of New Brunswick: Provincial Court judges are designated as Youth Criminal Court Judges for the purpose of dealing with young persons between the ages of 12 and 18 years who are charged with offences. 

The Provincial Court also has a Mental Health Court in the City of Saint John. The Mental Health Court in Saint John began as a pilot project under the direction of Judge Alfred Brien.  The model created by Judge Brien and the Mental Health Court Team was adopted as a permanent program of the Saint John Provincial Court on November 14, 2003. The Saint John Mental Health Court is a fine example of the success that can be achieved when the judiciary and various public and private agencies come together to address an issue that pervades much of society and unfortunately finds its way into the “mainstream of courts all too often”. This innovative approach has developed an effective means of dealing with individuals who come into conflict with the law as a result of a mental illness or intellectual disability.

Provincial ("inferior") Courts

The Provincial Courts in Canada are local trial "inferior" or "lower" courts of limited jurisdiction established in each of the provinces and territories of Canada.


These courts typically hear criminal, civil or “small claims”, family, traffic, and bylaw cases. Unlike the superior courts of Canada, the jurisdiction of the Provincial Courts is limited to those matters which are permitted by statute. . These courts are created by provincial statute and only have the jurisdiction granted by statute. They have no inherent jurisdiction.


Appeals of Provincial Court decisions are usually heard by the superior court of the province, in New Brunswick this is Court of Queen's Bench of New Brunswick Trial Division. These courts typically evolved from older magistrate, municipal, or local courts. Many of these former courts were as likely to have lay magistrates or justices of the peace presiding as they were to have a judge who had formal legal training, in New Brunswick the Province phased out the position of Justice of the Peace, now we only have Justices.

Statutory courts

The Supreme Court of Canada, the federal courts, the various appellate courts from the provinces and territories, and the numerous low-level provincial courts are statutory courts whose decision-making power is granted by either the federal parliament or a provincial legislature.


The word "statutory" refers to the fact that these courts' powers are derived from a statute and is defined and limited by the terms of the statute. A statutory court cannot try cases in areas of law that are not mentioned or suggested in the statute. In this sense, statutory courts are similar to non-judicial adjudicative bodies such as administrative tribunals, boards, and commissions, which are created and given limited power by legislation. The practical implication of this is that a statutory court cannot provide a type of legal remedy or relief that is not expressly or implicitly referred to in its enabling or empowering statute.

Jurisdiction of the Courts

In Wind Power Inc. v. Saskatchewan Power Corp., 1998 CanLII 14061 (SK QB) Justice GEATROS J. stated the following at paragraph 12:

[12]     I have a further observation in the matter of inherent jurisdiction.  This is a Superior Court having a specific characteristic that is stated by Furlong C.J. in Bursey v. Bursey (1966), 58 D.L.R. (2d) 451 (Nfld. S.C.) to be as follows, at p. 455:

  That characteristic is the manner in which plenary powers of a superior Court
may be cut down or limited.  The matter was considered just 300 years ago in
Peacock v. Bell and Kendal (1667), 1 Wms. Saund. 73 at p. 74, 85 E.R. 84, when, as it is reported, it was held:

     And the rule for jurisdiction is, that nothing shall be intended to be
     out of the jurisdiction of a Superior Court, but that which specially
     appears to be so; and on the contrary, nothing shall be intended
     to be within the jurisdiction of an Inferior Court but that which is
     expressly so alleged.

It would appear that this dictum has remained undisturbed by time as I find it
is repeated in substantially the same words in 9 Hals., 3rd ed., p. 349, as
follows:

      Prima facie, no matter is deemed to be beyond the jurisdiction of a
     superior court unless it is expressly shown to be so, while nothing is
     within the jurisdiction of an inferior court unless it is expressly
     shown on the face of the proceedings that the particular matter is within
     the cognisance of the particular court.

It is important to note nothing is within the jurisdiction of an inferior court unless it is expressly shown on the face of the proceedings (and expressly stated in the Courts founding statute) that the particular matter is within the cognisance of the particular court.

The decisions of this Court in Attorney General of Canada v. Law Society of British Columbia, [1982] 2 S.C.R. 307, Canada Labour Relations Board v. Paul L'Anglais Inc., supra, and Northern Telecom Canada Ltd. v. Communication Workers of Canada, supra, have approved the exercise of constitutional decision-making by tribunals in the exercise of their mandate but only when expressly permitted.

    It is inherent in system such as that established under the Constitution Act, that the courts will be the authority in the community to control the limits of the respective sovereignties of the two plenary governments, as well as to police agencies within each of these spheres to ensure their operations remain within their statutory boundaries.  Both duties of course fall upon the courts when acting within their own proper jurisdiction.  The superior courts of have general jurisdiction in the provinces, but the same principles apply to courts of subordinate jurisdiction when they are acting within their limited jurisdiction as described by their constituting statute.  Such courts must, in the application of the laws of the land whether they be federal or provincial statutes, determine, where the issue arises, the constitutional integrity of the measure in question.  Such a court of limited jurisdiction must, of course, be responding to a cause properly before it under its statute.

The point I wish to make is, if Jurisdiction has not been established upon which the honourable Court may hear the matters, further since the Honorable Court must reasonably must reasonably be operating upon it’s oath of office further since the supreme Court of Canada has rules that no judge may act outside his jurisdiction, and since I am not granting jurisdiction nor consenting to jurisdiction I say for this court to establish it’s own jurisdiction will only cause it self to be liable under commercial liability.

My understanding is when a Court acts outside its jurisdiction it opens itself up to personal and commercial liability, a position normally protected against, by “The principle of judicial immunity”, which usually ensures that a judge can make decisions without the threat of prosecution for acts done or words spoken in the course of his judicial functions. That is unless the Court steps outside his jurisdiction.

Lower Courts are the most susceptible to stepping outside there Jurisdiction, it is worth repeating that nothing is within the jurisdiction of an inferior court unless it is expressly shown on the face of the proceedings (and expressly stated in the Courts founding statute) that the particular matter is within the cognisance of the particular court.

The lower Court must stay within its jurisdiction or be held liable for those actions, both personally and commercially.

                                                         

 For further infomation please read:

  Canada's Judicial System: Explained