Decisions

Subscribe to the RSS Feed for Ontario Court of Justice Decisions

• New Decisions : Ontario Court of Justice

Ontario Court of Justice Recent Decisions

• 2026-04-08 Toronto (City) v. Allison, 2026 ONCJ 205 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Criminal and statutory offences — Provincial offences — Short‑term rentals — Charges under City of Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 547 — Whether defendant carried on business without being registered and failed to include registration number in advertisement — Booking and deposit proven, advertisement not proven — Count 1 made out, due diligence rejected — Count 2 not made out — Conviction on count 1, second charge dismissed<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Strict liability — Due diligence — Whether due diligence defence negates liability for operating without registration — Knowledge application was “being processed” and no registration number issued — Alternatives included waiting for own registration number — Post‑offence steps treated as sentencing considerations — Reasonable mistake of fact not established — Due diligence defence rejected<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Advertising offences — Operator registration number — Whether actus reus proven for failure to include registration number in advertisement — No screenshot or proof of public notice — Compliance referral and listing number insufficient — Speculation about removed listing rejected — Actus reus not proven beyond a reasonable doubt — Charge dismissed<br />Statutory interpretation — Municipal licensing — Carrying on business — Meaning of “reservation” and “carry on the business” (City of Toronto Act, s. 86, Chapter 547) — Does a booking before registration amount to operating as an “operator”? — Reservation defined as a booking and commitment — Harmonious reading of text, context and purpose — Actus reus of operating without registration established<br />Evidence — Business records — Stay data — Admissibility and weight of Airbnb stay data and Salesforce records — Business records affidavits admitted after disclosure addressed — Records compared and identical — Officer’s testimony credible, hearsay exceptions applied — Proof of booking, operator ID and deposit accepted — Reliability of records confirmed — Records admitted
• 2026-04-02 Ankrah v. Amponsah, 2026 ONCJ 197 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Procedure — Costs — Entitlement — Parenting time claim struck — Presumptive entitlement to costs under subrule 24(14) — Whether the applicant is entitled to costs as the successful party — Respondent failed to complete APCO intake despite multiple extensions — Presumption not rebutted — Costs awarded<br />Procedure — Costs — Quantum and conduct — Reasonableness and proportionality under subrule 24(14) — Whether unreasonable conduct justifies elevated costs — Respondent’s non-compliance and abandonment caused needless expense — Hourly rate reasonable — Time limited to parenting time issue — Amount the unsuccessful party could reasonably expect to pay — Costs fixed at $3,955<br />Procedure — Costs — Payee — Legal Aid Services Act, 2020, s. 12(1) — Should costs be payable directly to Legal Aid Ontario — Receipt of legal aid not a factor in assessing costs — Court declines to involve itself in internal legal aid arrangements — Applicant may assign costs to Legal Aid Ontario — Costs payable to the applicant<br />Procedure — Costs — Enforcement and payment terms — Ability to pay considered without excusing unreasonable conduct — Whether a payment schedule should be ordered — Limited means addressed through modest monthly payments with acceleration clause — Payments to remain in good standing or full amount becomes due — Monthly payment schedule ordered
• 2026-04-02 R. v. Patel, 2026 ONCJ 200 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Criminal and statutory offences — Impaired operation and 80-plus — Elements and proof — Whether impairment and blood alcohol concentration offences made out — Evidence of slow driving, angled parking, slurred speech and bloodshot eyes — Certificate of a Qualified Breath Technician, s. 320.14(1)(a)(b) Criminal Code — R. v. Stellato applied to level of impairment — Findings of guilt entered<br />Rights and freedoms — Charter s. 7 — Self‑incrimination — Does section 7 shield the accused’s courtroom behaviour and words from later use? — Fitzpatrick described contextual self‑incrimination limits — Observations in open court not compelled, no duty to caution — Crown properly reported suspected impaired driving — No section 7 breach — Charter application dismissed<br />Rights and freedoms — Charter ss. 9 and 8 — Detention and arrest — Did police have reasonable grounds to detain and arrest for impaired operation? — Gardner affirmed highway safety purpose for stops — Macfie summarized reasonable grounds standard — Slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, angled parking and complaint supported arrest — No section 9 or 8 breach — Charter applications dismissed<br />Procedure — Charter applications — Summary dismissal — Should the Charter application be summarily dismissed as manifestly frivolous? — R. v. Haevischer set rigorous threshold and fairness rationale — Late, sparse materials but alternative adjournment available — Novel claims not obviously futile — Applications heard on merits — Summary dismissal refused
• 2026-03-30 Milton (Town) v. Sidhu, 2026 ONCJ 178 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Municipalities — By-laws — Remediation orders — Municipal Act, 2001, s. 431 — Is a remediation order necessary and what scope is proper? — Purpose to correct the contravention emphasised — Terms requiring permit application, removal of fill, restoration, access for officials, notice to purchasers — Defendants’ topographical survey proposal not appropriate — Correcting the contravention required — Remediation order granted<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Sentencing — Regulatory offences — What is a fit monetary penalty given remediation costs? — Paramount objective of general deterrence applied, Cotton Felts considered — Costs of compliance treated as component of total penalty, R. v. Brown — Potential environmental harm aggravating, absence of harm neutral, Torroco Industries — Fine reduced by 25 percent — Fines of $7500 each imposed<br />Statutory interpretation — Municipal by-law — Exemptions — Does the s. 3.4(3) “maintenance” exemption apply? — Size increased and dimensions altered beyond maintenance — Disjunctive with by-law purpose and s. 2.3 prohibition — Definition of “site alteration” engaged — King v. 2424155 Ontario Inc. cited on interpretation — Exemption not mitigating — Exemption inapplicable
• 2026-03-27 R. v. Xiong, 2026 ONCJ 174 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Rights and freedoms — Charter of Rights — Right to counsel, immediacy — Did police inform immediately upon arrest under s. 10(b)? — Eight-minute delay with no safety concerns — Purpose to mitigate legal jeopardy and psychological disadvantage — Authorities applied R. v. Debot, R. v. Suberu, R. v. Pino, R. v. Willier — Breach found<br />Rights and freedoms — Charter of Rights — Language and interpretation — Do special circumstances require a Mandarin interpreter for s. 10(b) information? — Objective indicators of limited English comprehension — Video shows non-understanding of cautions and breath demands — R. v. Vanstaceghem and R. v. Barros-DaSilva applied — Failure tantamount to not providing rights to counsel — Breach found<br />Evidence — Exclusion of evidence — Charter breaches — Should breath samples be excluded under s. 24(2)? — Grant framework applied, seriousness and impact weigh strongly — Reliability and societal interest considered with R. v. Tim and R. v. Harrison — Balancing favours dissociation from misconduct — Breath samples excluded