This article analyses the possible existence of a constitutional right of a party to be understood in both official languages by justices of the Supreme Court of Canada, without the assistance of an interpreter or translator. This matter has already received a negative response from the Supreme Court of Canada in 1986 with regards to the courts of New Brunswick in Société des Acadiens v Association of Parents. This article attempts to set the basis on which the courts could reject that precedent of the Supreme Court of Canada and recognize the right to be understood directly, in both official languages, without the assistance of an interpreter or translator before that Court.