Valin then tried to appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, at that time the court of last resort for Canada within the British Empire.

When Canada was created in 1867, the House of Commons initially relied on the pre-Confederation laws from each of the provinces to deal with controverted elections.

[5]: s.6  Those courts would have exclusive jurisdiction to hear and decide election petitions, taking that power away from the House of Commons.

On appeal, Valin was represented by Honoré-Cyrias Pelletier, QC, a lawyer who specialised in controverted elections.

He also argued that Parliament had in fact created a federal court, and that it was immaterial whether the right be characterised as a political right or a civil right.

(All six judges of the Court initially heard the appeal, but Justice Strong did not participate in the decision due to illness.

The longest set of reasons was given by Chief Justice Ritchie, who outlined the history of election challenges.

[2]: 10–13  He also cited the power of the federal Parliament to govern its own election processes under s. 41 of the Constitution Act, 1867,[2]: 14–18  before turning to the issue of court jurisdiction.

His main point to add was that if Parliament could not confer jurisdiction on the provincial courts to implement federal laws, such as election laws passed under the authority of s. 41 of the Constitution Act, 1867 then there was a significant gap in the constitutional powers of the Parliament.

[2]: 38, 49–51  He concluded that Parliament had the authority to confer jurisdiction over federal law on the provincial courts.

[2]: 74–77 Justice Gwynne focussed on the argument that the issue of election challenges was a political right, rather than a civil right, which could not be assigned to the courts.

[7] In a separate decision from the jurisdictional issue, the Supreme Court unanimously dismissed the appeal relating to the cross-petition.

For varying reasons, the Court agreed that there was only a limited time to file a cross-petition against the unsuccessful candidation, and Valin had not met the timelimit.

The power of the federal Parliament in relation to elections to the House of Commons was a matter of considerable public importance.

[12][13] With the jurisdictional matters decided by the Judicial Committee, the election challenge resumed in front of Chief Justice Meredith in the Superior Court of Quebec.

At the hearing, Valin admitted that corrupt practices had been committed by his agents, sufficient to void the election.

[15][16][17] The case is also cited for this purpose in constitutional law texts,[18][19] and in analysis of superior court jurisdiction.

[20] Following the abolition of Canadian appeals to the Judicial Committee, the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada directed the Department of Justice to prepare a compilation of all constitutional cases decided by the Judicial Committee on the construction and interpretation of the British North America Act, 1867 (now the Constitution Act, 1867), for the assistance of the Canadian Bench and Bar.