Justice Thorburn of the Court of Appeal of Ontario discusses her education, her career, and her advice for law students.
The Honourable Justice Julie Thorburn of the Court of Appeal for Ontario is visiting the University of Toronto’s Faculty of Law until April 2025 as she researches statutory interpretation in bilingual and bijural jurisdictions. She is also giving guest lectures, meeting with students, and auditing classes. Justice Thorburn said she sees her role at the Faculty this year as “a two way street, both being an access point for students and learning from students and faculty members.”
Justice Thorburn has served on the bench for 18 years. She was first appointed to the Superior Court of Ontario in 2006, administered Ontario’s Divisional Court, and was then selected to Ontario’s highest court in 2019. Before becoming a judge, Justice Thorburn was a partner with Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP and the head of the firm’s Information Communications and Entertainment law group. She is also a trained musician, holding an A.R.C.T. in Performance Piano, the Silver Medal in Voice from the Royal Conservatory of Music, and a Bachelor of Arts degree in classical singing from the l’Université de Montréal. She has litigated and adjudicated matters in both official languages, and co-authored a report about improving access to justice in French in 2015. Ultra Vires sat down with her in September to discuss her career and her advice for law students.
Ultra Vires (UV): You previously said that, in law school, you had “a clear recollection of feeling like I just wouldn’t be able to make this work[.]” What would you say to a student who is struggling to find their place in law school?
Justice Thorburn (JT): I think it’s really important to find that person who will notice and reach out to you. Sometimes that person just happens to see you looking particularly vulnerable and does something. But sometimes you have to seek them out. Sometimes you have to say, “I’m struggling. I need some help.” Don’t be afraid to ask. … I was lucky. I was too afraid to ask, but John Whyte, former Dean of Queen’s University’s law school, noticed …
I felt like everybody else who was there had studied a subject relevant to law: political science, economics or philosophy, and I thought, “What am I doing here? Should I really be here?” … I think more people from different backgrounds come to law school now, which is a good thing, but in my day, I didn’t know anybody else with my background. …
It’s important to remember that we all have those moments. It’s funny, when I came here the very first day, I had this feeling of, oh my gosh, It’s my first day of school! Who am I going to meet? Who’s going to be here? … I’m in a new place and I don’t know anybody. We all have that feeling, and it’s not something to be ashamed of.
UV: How did your education in music affect your work in law?
JT: It was a very unusual route to law. Music was a passion for me from a very young age. I grew up in Kingston, Ontario, but I was also on scholarship at the Royal Conservatory of Music in Toronto while in high school and did courses on the history of music, harmony, analysis, counterpoint, piano, and voice. I practised many hours a day, and it was a lot on top of school. I thought that was my trajectory; that’s what I wanted to do.
I moved to Montreal and then Italy, but I realized that, while I loved performing, and the rigour of practice, practice, practice… the lifestyle was very difficult. No job security, working nights, reliant on the approval of others. So, I thought I might combine the performance aspect through litigation, while at the same time having a saner lifestyle.
We are lucky that there’s a job where one can both prepare with intellectual rigour and be a performer. Your performance is your trial, your examination for discovery, or your cross examination. And learning to practice, practice, practice: how to start in the middle; at the end; or at the second bar helped in the preparation for court proceedings.
Because sometimes you’re in court and you have your script. You’re ready, you’ve practiced, and you know how you want to present your argument. But the judge says, “I’m actually interested in this issue.” That’s at page nine, but you can’t say, “I’m really sorry. When I get to page nine, I’ll answer your question.” They want an answer.
It was a good exercise for me to have practised my material well enough to be able to do it backwards, forwards, and inside out. And it helped me address the fear of performance.
UV: How did you come to focus your private practice on copyright issues?
JT: I spent my entire career at the same firm and they were very good to me. But I think that, even if you have an idea of what you want to do, it’s a good idea to develop breadth of experience at the beginning of your career. I did commercial litigation working on bankruptcies, receiverships, contractual disputes, tort law issues, and other things. As I got more senior, I thought to myself: Where should I specialize? What value can I add? I can litigate in two languages and I have a background in music, and so I had some knowledge of copyright issues from that standpoint.
And then a file came into our firm. It was about neighbouring rights that allowed performers and producers to earn royalties when they performed. The clients needed someone who could do cross examinations in both English and French, and who understood the music world. So, guess what? That was a perfect file for me. I was the lead counsel on that hearing and that [file] got me into that area of law. I was in some way marrying my knowledge of an area of the industry to my legal experience, which was very rewarding.
I guess the short answer to your question is, it sort of fell in my lap, but then it made me realize that I really wanted to spend more time on it.
I also did language rights cases and international commercial arbitrations, given my language skills and commercial litigation background.
UV: Do you remember what it felt like to sit for your very first case?
JT: I remember a friend and colleague, the honourable John Macdonald, who said to me, “There’s one thing you need to remember: if you don’t know what to do, take a brief recess and consult one of your colleagues.” It was very good advice and a reminder that I had many wonderful colleagues like him who were prepared to work with me and help me learn the ropes.
I was used to being a litigator, where you can’t tell the judge that “15 minutes from now, I’ll have a smart answer to your question.” As a judge, it’s important to get it right; to take the time to think things through and where necessary, consult your colleagues. You may ask them, “How do I handle this litigant who’s going off the rails? How would you approach them? Should I be calling somebody to help?” You’re in charge, but as a trial judge, you’re by yourself. On the Court of Appeal, there are three of you so my first day as a Court of Appeal judge was a little easier than my first day as a trial judge.
UV: You have done so many different types of legal work. You’ve been a commercial litigator, an author, a course instructor, a judge—what advice would you give to students trying to choose a direction in the legal profession?
JT: I think you should look into yourself and ask, who am I and what do I want? It’s important to ask: Am I the kind of person that wants to work in the rat race? Is that what’s going to make me happy? Has my situation changed and are there new life priorities? And if you’re not happy, you need to think about that. Because you’re not doing it for somebody else, you’re doing it for yourself.
The other thing is, what are you good at? How is this going to marry interests that you already have? Because the truth is some of us are good at writing but not so great at cocktail parties. Some of us are good with people, or we’re great mentors. So, try to marry your aspirations to your strengths. You may want to get involved in legal associations like the Advocates’ Society. Or you may be interested in social justice and want to work for legal clinics. Or you may want to do commercial deals, or criminal law. It’s not a value judgement; it’s about what you are good at and how you can best contribute to the system. And it’s different for everybody; the short answer is, there is no one answer.
This interview has been edited for brevity and clarity.
