673 is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision on protection of judicial independence under section 11(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

A Provincial Court of Ontario judge held that he could not decide a sentence appeal for a conviction of careless driving under the Ontario Highway Traffic Act because he was not in a position to judge whether he was independent, and a person charged with an offense has a right to an independent tribunal under section 11(d) of the Charter.

Impartiality is "a state of mind" while independence is the quality of the relationship the judge has with the executive.

The Court noted that difficult standards for judicial independence could not be set because section 11(d) applied to too many different types of tribunals.

This was enough to suggest serious thought goes into the setting of the salaries, though the Supreme Court added such committees may not be needed in every case.

Judicial independence would later be extended under the Provincial Judges Reference of 1997, which followed Valente in stating that judges should enjoy administrative independence; however, this meant overturning obiter dicta in Valente that judicial salary commissions were not needed to ensure a salary is free of political manipulation.