Bill 25 rewrites large parts of the Courts of Justice Act to shift operational authority toward chief and coordinating judges, codify prevention and review mechanisms for judicial ethics breaches, and implement multiple recommendations on judges’ remuneration and pensions. It clarifies who assigns cases and what chief/associate judges must do to ensure justice is delivered “within a reasonable time,” tightens complaint handling at the Conseil de la magistrature, and introduces new sanctions and publication requirements for disciplinary findings.
The bill also restructures pension and remuneration rules: it makes certain additional remuneration contributory, raises age limits tied to pension rules, creates a pathway for municipal judges to redeem past service and transfer prior public pension entitlements into the judges’ plan, and standardizes actuarial methods and timelines for those transfers. Together, the operational, disciplinary and pension changes are designed to increase public confidence but will require administrative work by courts, Retraite Québec and the Conseil de la magistrature to implement.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill expands the chief judge’s power to apportion and reassign workload, requires judges to cooperate with case-management directives, overhauls the Conseil de la magistrature’s complaint and inquiry process (including committee composition and publication of reports), and adds pension redemption and transfer mechanisms for municipal and per diem judges.
Who It Affects
Court of Québec judges (including associate/coordinating roles), municipal judges, presiding justices of the peace, the Conseil de la magistrature, Retraite Québec, and the Minister/administrative staff who implement disciplinary and pension decisions.
Why It Matters
It converts managerial practice into statutory duty—giving chief judges explicit authority to reassign judges and require reporting—while creating clearer, published discipline procedures and new pension mobility options; compliance officers and court administrators must prepare for new reporting, disclosure and actuarial processes.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
Bill 25 starts by adding a purpose provision to the Courts of Justice Act that directs judges and justice officers to consider public trust, impartiality and timely access when performing their functions. It then formalizes several coordination offices (associate chief judge, coordinating judge) and substantially strengthens the chief judge’s managerial remit: the chief judge may allocate cases across divisions and districts and may require judges to provide information needed to manage workload and scheduling.
On ethics, the bill reshapes the Conseil de la magistrature’s composition and internal rules, gives the chief municipal judge a vice‑chair role on the council, and requires the council to publish its rules of procedure and the reasoning for admissibility and inquiry decisions. The secretary must screen complaints, assist complainants in drafting them, and transmit admissible complaints to the council.
The bill sets out who cannot sit on committees, prescribes committee composition (mix of judges and non‑judges), and requires case‑management conferences and timelines for inquiry disclosures.If an inquiry finds a complaint justified, the committee may recommend a range of measures—from training, therapy or reassignments, to reprimands and suspensions without pay (up to six months), to recommending removal proceedings. Reports and the council’s inquiry report must be sent to the judge, the plaintiff and the Minister and published on the council’s website.
The chief judge or chief municipal judge must implement council decisions and must file a complaint if a subordinate judge refuses to comply.On pensions and remuneration, the bill makes certain office-related supplements contributory for pension calculation, removes or replaces multi‑year holding requirements in some instances, allows per‑diem judges to be paid for half‑days and for time spent taking a matter under advisement, and introduces a structured redemption process for municipal judges to buy back service and an option to transfer prior government plan benefits into the judges’ pension plan. Retraite Québec is given specific deadlines and actuarial methods (including historic valuation bases) for computing redemption costs and transfer values.
The bill also contains transitional rules that preserve pre‑existing procedures for complaints and vesting for judges in office before assent.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The Conseil’s inquiry committee will be composed of three judges and two non‑judge members; the secretary must notify both plaintiff and judge when the committee is formed.
The council must publish admissibility dismissals and inquiry reports on its website within 10 days, omitting party names where specified.
If the committee finds a complaint justified it may recommend suspension without pay for up to six months or recommend that the Minister file a removal application to the Court of Appeal.
Municipal judges continuing in office on 1 July 2024 may apply to Retraite Québec to redeem past service or transfer prior public plan benefits; those applications must be filed within 180 days of assent and Retraite Québec’s redemption proposal is valid for 60 days.
The statutory maximum ages tied to judges’ plan membership and supplementary benefits are increased from 69 to 71 years for affected plans and benefit calculations use actuarial bases referenced to 2019–2020 valuation data.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Purpose clause: public trust and timely justice
The bill inserts an explicit purpose provision directing all court actors to consider public trust, impartiality and the need for prompt, diligent justice. Practically, this elevates those goals as interpretive guides for other statutory duties and gives administrative actors a statutory standard to reference when justifying case management or conduct rules.
Chief, associate and coordinating judges: clarified powers and duties
These replacements add concrete managerial powers: the chief judge must coordinate, apportion and supervise judges’ work, may assign judges across divisions and districts, and can require information from judges for workload management. Associate chief judges and coordinating judges are placed under the chief judge’s authority, must help ensure trials run within a reasonable time, and their orders carry the same execution force as the chief judge’s. For court administrators this converts informal reassignment practices into enforceable duties and requires systems to supply the requested performance data.
Complaint pathway: intake, admissibility, inquiry and publication
The bill tightens intake by requiring written complaints, authorizes the secretary to help draft incomplete complaints, and disqualifies complaints that remain incomplete. It defines inadmissible categories (frivolous, duplicate or out‑of‑time for former judges), mandates timely notification to parties, and makes the council’s decisions and inquiry reports public on its website. The case‑management conference and formal disclosure timetable shift the process toward a more structured, quasi‑procedural inquiry with published timelines.
Inquiry mechanics and sanctions the committee may recommend
The committee must include both judges and non‑judges; it holds a case management conference within 30 days of notice and controls evidence and order of presentations. If it finds a complaint justified, it can seek remedial steps (training, therapy, reassignment), issue a reprimand, suspend without pay (max six months), or ask the Minister to seek removal. The committee’s role is framed as both corrective and preventive—able to recommend non‑punitive remedies and to follow up on implementation.
Conseil de la magistrature: composition, vice‑chair, procedures and transparency
The bill adjusts appointment language—shifting from recommendation‑based wording to consultation or merit‑based language—and designates the chief municipal judge as vice‑chair. It bars political actors and recent candidates from council membership for four years and requires the council to publish rules of procedure, including time limits, formats and conflict‑of‑interest prevention measures. This formalizes transparency obligations and tightens independence safeguards around membership.
Remuneration and pension changes for judges and municipal judges
Key pension changes: certain office supplements become contributory, the age limits for plan membership move toward 71, per‑diem judges may be paid half‑day rates and for advisement time, and municipal judges who remained on 1 July 2024 can redeem past service or transfer prior government plan benefits into the judges’ plan. The bill prescribes actuarial bases (using valuation data as at 31 December 2019 and 2020) and sets application windows, payment methods and interest rules administered by Retraite Québec.
Transitional rules and regulatory fixes
The bill contains multiple transitional clauses preserving pre‑existing complaint rules for matters before assent, grandfathering certain appointment tenure rules for incumbents, and establishing implementation schedules (e.g., 180‑day application windows, 12‑month review deadlines for Retraite Québec). It also amends pension and partition regulations to align technical language and indexing formulas and shifts some regulatory determinations from by‑laws to government regulation.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on this topic across all five countries.
Explore this topic in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Litigants and accused persons — faster access to hearings and a statutory obligation on chief and associate judges to prioritize reasonable‑time trials improves prospects for reduced backlog and timelier hearings.
- Judicial ethics oversight users and complainants — clearer intake rules, mandatory publication of decisions and a defined inquiry timetable increase transparency and predictability for those filing complaints.
- Municipal judges who stayed in office on 1 July 2024 — they gain an explicit path to redeem past service and transfer accrued benefits from public plans into the judges’ pension plan, improving portability and potential pension outcomes.
- Court administrators with strong case management systems — the bill formalizes powers they can use to smooth scheduling and inter‑district assignments, enabling more efficient use of judicial resources.
- The Conseil de la magistrature — it receives clearer statutory authority to set procedures, publish decisions and use a wider toolkit of remedial measures, strengthening its ability to prevent and respond to ethical failures.
Who Bears the Cost
- Judges — increased managerial demands, mandatory reporting and the risk of disciplinary measures (including suspension without pay) raise compliance costs and may change day‑to‑day autonomy.
- Retraite Québec and pension administrators — they must compute redemption costs and transfer values using prescribed historic actuarial bases, handle tight application windows, and conduct reviews within set deadlines.
- Provincial government/Consolidated Revenue Fund — transfers from other public plans, indexing changes and contributory adjustments create fiscal and cash‑flow effects that government must absorb or budget for.
- Court registries and Conseil staff — new publication duties, complaint assistance and stricter timelines will require staffing, IT updates and possible training to meet procedural and transparency obligations.
- Municipalities and employers — standardization of contribution rules and the option to include additional remuneration in pensionable salary may change employer contribution obligations and budgeting.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill tries to strengthen public trust by increasing managerial oversight, transparency and remedial teeth, but each transparency and accountability tool—broad assignment powers, public reports, new sanctions and pension portability—cuts against core protections of judicial independence, confidentiality and actuarial fairness; the central dilemma is how to make judges more accountable and court processes faster without undermining independence, privacy or creating unfair pension outcomes.
The bill positions managerial control and transparency as remedies for delays and ethical lapses, but that design creates implementation trade‑offs. Giving the chief judge express authority to assign judges across divisions and districts improves flexibility but risks friction with judicial independence norms if the reassignment process lacks transparent safeguards or appeal routes.
Similarly, publishing council reports increases accountability but requires careful redaction rules and procedural protections to avoid undue reputational harm from unproven allegations.
Pension and transfer mechanics use specific historic actuarial bases and tight administrative windows (180 days to apply; 60‑day proposal acceptance periods). Using valuation inputs dated to 2019–2020 simplifies calculation comparability but can produce material gains or losses relative to market conditions at the time of transfer; Retraite Québec will face challenging actuarial judgments and potential pushback if methodology outcomes appear arbitrary.
Finally, many provisions impose operational duties—case reporting, monthly backlog reports, online publication, and application processing—with no explicit funding in the bill, creating an unfunded implementation burden for courts, the Conseil and Retraite Québec.
There's more to this law than the bill.
Codify Laws traces every connection across the legislative lifecycle.