Decisions
A collection of judgments of the Ontario Court of Justice, primarily released after April 1, 2004, is posted on CanLII. The CanLII website is not an exhaustive source of judgments of the Ontario Court of Justice. The official version of the reasons for judgment is the signed original or handwritten endorsement in the court file. In the event that there is a question about the content of a judgment, the original in the court file takes precedence.
Judgments are available in the language provided.
Copies of judgments of the Ontario Court of Justice can be obtained by contacting the respective court office where the matter was heard. A photocopy charge is payable. Judgments are also available on a number of subscription based services such as LexisNexis® QuicklawTM and WestlawNext® Canada.
Subscribe to the RSS Feed for Ontario Court of Justice Decisions
- New Decisions : Ontario Court of Justice

Ontario Court of Justice Recent Decisions
-
2026-03-12 R. v. Szakiel, 2026 ONCJ 135 (CanLII)
Key Words: Procedure — Directed verdict — Criminal trial — Whether there is a basis in the evidence upon which a reasonable jury, properly instructed, could convict — Test from R. v. Kelly, with R. v. Arcuri and R. v. Jackson, applied — Evidence viewed in the reasonable light most favourable to the Crown — Directed verdict refused<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Failure to comply — Release order — Must the Crown negate exceptions contained in a “house arrest” condition — Exception not an essential element but a potential defence — R. v. Blaker followed, R. v. Robinson distinguished on particularised pleading — Information not sufficiently detailed to require negating exceptions — Guilty verdict<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Defences — Lawful excuse — Whether evidence establishes an air of reality to travelling to or from work — R. v. Zora and R. v. Refaeh on persuasive burden — R. v. Nadeau against speculation — Accused found alone downtown at 4:30 a.m., no evidence of employment or travel — Guilty verdict -
2026-03-09 R. v. Singh, 2026 ONCJ 124 (CanLII)
Key Words: Procedure — Summary dismissal — Criminal Rules of the Ontario Court of Justice, r. 3.1(1) — Whether a late Charter application may be dismissed without a hearing on the merits — Non-compliance threatens trial fairness and court scheduling — Jordan and Cody on culture of complacency — Tash and Kazman emphasising enforcement of deadlines — Charter ss. 10(b) and 24(2) application not reached — Application summarily dismissed<br />Procedure — Adjournments — Trial management — Whether an adjournment should be granted instead of summary dismissal — Additional witnesses and late disclosure request would cause further delay — Community interest in the efficient and expeditious resolution of criminal cases — Limited court resources and impact on other defendants noted — s. 11(b) delay attribution to Defence acknowledged — Adjournment refused -
2026-03-05 R. v. Palacios, 2026 ONCJ 118 (CanLII)
Key Words: Criminal and statutory offences — Sentencing — Historical sexual offences against a child — Proportionality under s. 718.1 — Application of Friesen on gravity and harm to children — Did denunciation and deterrence require a penitentiary term? — Abuse of trust, grooming, escalating sexual violence, life‑shattering impact — Global sentence of five years imposed<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Conditional sentence — Community‑based sentences — Is a conditional sentence under s. 742.1 available or appropriate? — Sentence exceeds two years, objectives of denunciation and deterrence paramount — Consideration of rehabilitation and restraint insufficient to displace incarceration — Conditional sentence unavailable and declined<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Consecutive sentences — Totality — Whether consecutive terms should be ordered subject to totality — Distinct episodes and increasing seriousness justify consecutive sentences — Totality principle applied to ensure sentence not unduly harsh — Consecutive terms structured with totality respected<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Ancillary orders — SOIRA, DNA, weapons, non‑communication — Should lifetime SOIRA, DNA sampling, weapons prohibition and non‑communication be imposed? — Orders under ss. 490.012(1), 490.012(3)(a), 487.051, 109, 743.21 granted — VFS waived — Ancillary orders imposed<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Sentencing principles — Aggravating and mitigating factors — Recognition of harm, abuse of position of trust under s. 718.2 — Consideration of prior counselling, remorse, low risk — Contemporary principles applied per Sheppard and Parranto — Custodial sentence emphasising denunciation and deterrence — Global sentence of five years imposed -
2026-03-05 R. v. MacChesney, 2026 ONCJ 121 (CanLII)
Key Words: Criminal and statutory offences — Sentencing — Discharge — Whether a discharge under s. 730 of the Criminal Code is contrary to the public interest in intimate partner violence — Denunciation and deterrence predominant yet discharge available in exceptional cases — Unusual mitigating factors found — Discharged upon completing probation ordered — Conditional discharge with probation ordered<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Sentencing — Mitigating factors — To what extent service-related concussions and PTSD lessen moral responsibility — Documented concussions and mTBI, psychotherapy, military service and deployments considered — Moral responsibility lessened due to effects of combat and brain injuries — Reduced blameworthiness recognised<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Sentencing — Collateral consequences — Whether significant collateral consequences of conviction should affect sentence, relying on R. v. Morgan 2020 ONCA 279 — Risk of compulsory release from Canadian Forces and loss of reintegration supports found — Public interest in supported transition noted — Collateral consequences weighed<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Ancillary orders — DNA order — Whether a DNA order should issue for secondary designated offences under the National DNA Identification Act — Assaults designated as secondary offences — Best interests of the administration of justice considered — DNA sample to National databank ordered — DNA order made -
2026-03-04 R. v. Vanderburg, 2026 ONCJ 112 (CanLII)
Key Words: Evidence — Credibility and assessment — W.(D.) framework — Application of R. v. W.D. to competing accounts — Do the accused’s denials or inconsistencies leave a reasonable doubt? — Weight of complainant’s recordings as near‑contemporaneous documentation — Police observations and mugshot undermining accused’s version — Accused’s testimony incompatible with objective evidence — Accused evidence rejected<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Assault and related offences — Criminal Code, ss. 266, 267(c), 264.1(1)(a) — Do the videos and police evidence prove counts one to six beyond a reasonable doubt? — Complainant’s core narrative consistent and corroborated — Accused’s blanket denials disbelieved — Pattern of assaults and threats established — Convictions entered on counts one to six<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Defences — Self‑defence — Whether the accused’s claim of self‑defence raises a reasonable doubt on the September 29 incident — Videos depicting coercion and control, not de‑escalation — Lack of injuries observed by police contradicting claimed black eye — Verbal behaviour inconsistent with defensive posture — Self‑defence rejected<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Trial management — Sufficiency of evidence on single count — Whether the November 6, 2023 assault charge should be dismissed for no evidence — Crown acknowledging no evidence tendered on that date — Court dismissing the count accordingly — Charge dismissed for no evidence