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
-
2026-09-09 Halton (Regional Municipality) v. Lawson, 2026 ONCJ 535 (CanLII)
Key Words: Criminal and statutory offences — Highway Traffic Act — Traffic control signals — Failing to stop at red light — Whether passing a marked stop line on a red light completes the offence — Highway Traffic Act, s. 144(5) and s. 144(18.1) applied to required stopping position — Red-light camera photographs accepted — Conviction entered<br />Evidence — Highway Traffic Act — Certificate evidence — Admissibility and reliability — Whether allegedly false wording rendered the certificate of offence unreliable — Highway Traffic Act, s. 205.21, statements admissible absent evidence to the contrary — Certified photographs and proof of ownership tendered — Certificate and exhibits accepted — Guilt found<br />Statutory interpretation — Highway Traffic Act — Ontario Traffic Manual — Legal status of guidance — Whether Ontario Traffic Manual Book 11 governs “lawfulness” of stop line placement — Manual characterised as guidance and not legislation — O.Reg. 615 contrasted as regulating signs — “Lawfulness” framed as misnomer — Stop line compliance required<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Absolute liability — Highway Traffic Act — Availability of defences — Whether due diligence defence is available for failing to stop at a red light — Offence characterised as absolute liability, R. v. Kurtzman cited — Prosecution required only to prove actus reus beyond reasonable doubt — No viable legal defence — Conviction entered -
2026-09-08 Ismail v. Dayr, 2026 ONCJ 531 (CanLII)
Key Words: Family — International child support — 2007 Convention, International Recovery of Child Support and Family Maintenance Convention Act, 2023 — Application to establish an order for child support in Ontario — Reciprocity with Norway and procedures under the ISOA and Family Law Rules — Ontario law applied to amount of support — Support deduction order issued<br />Family — Child support — Start date — Prospective support from date application issued — Whether the presumption on start date was rebutted — MacKinnon v. MacKinnon and Balian v. Balian applied — Start date selected for ease of calculation — Child support ordered to start<br />Family — Child support — Income determination — Whether the father provided clear evidence of annual income — Updated sworn financial statement, tax return, Notice of Assessment and pay stubs ordered and filed — Current income information used when available, Vanos v. Vanos and Sarreye v. Sheikhamed applied — Annual income assessed<br />Family — Child support — Undue hardship — Child Support Guidelines, s. 10 — Whether high access costs create undue hardship justifying reduction of table amount — Test from Matthews v. Matthews and onus for documentation considered — Hardship not exceptional, standard of living not lower — Undue hardship claim dismissed<br />Family — Child support — Credits, arrears and payment — What credits should be received for child support paid and “care package” — Credit allowed for support paid and documented “care package”, travel costs not child support — Child support arrears fixed, modest repayment ordered — Arrears payable monthly and enforced by support deduction order issued -
2026-09-02 R. v. Curran, 2026 ONCJ 523 (CanLII)
Key Words: Criminal and statutory offences — Sentencing — Sexual offences against children — R. v. Friesen principles, denunciation and deterrence — What fit sentence for invitation to sexual touching, sexual touching and breach of probation — Aggravating factors include age 14, invasion, secluded outdoor area, moral responsibility — Concurrent custodial terms imposed — Jail sentence imposed<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Sentencing — Pre-sentence custody and remand conditions — R. v. Summers credit, R. v. Downes mitigation — Whether remand conditions and mental health impacts mitigate sentence — Evidence accepted of confinement, lockdowns and worsening schizophrenia — Pre-sentence custody credited at 1.5 to 1 — Credit applied, remaining sentence calculated<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Conditional release — Delayed parole ineligibility — Criminal Code, s. 743.6, R. v. Goulet — Whether denunciation or deterrence requires parole delayed to one half of sentence — No heightened violence, brutality or degradation found — No clear evidence of need for exceptional measure — Parole delay refused<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Ancillary orders — Sexual offence prohibitions — Criminal Code, s. 161, s. 109, s. 743.21, SOIRA, DNA Databanking — What ancillary orders are required following convictions — Lifetime SOIRA order, DNA order, weapons prohibition, and non-communication ordered — Section 161 prohibition imposed with submissions invited on wording — Ancillary orders made, victim fine surcharge waived -
2026-09-02 R. v. Roberts, 2026 ONCJ 524 (CanLII)
Key Words: Criminal and statutory offences — Impaired operation and breath demands — Criminal Code, s. 320.14(1)(a) and s. 320.15(1) — Whether reasonable grounds to believe impairment existed to authorise arrest and approved instrument demand — Subjective and objective components assessed — Officer observations weighed against recordings — Grounds not objectively reasonable, demand unlawful — Acquittal entered<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Refusal to comply with demand — Criminal Code, s. 320.15(1) — Whether refusal charge can stand where approved instrument demand was unlawful — No legal obligation to comply with unlawful demand — Refusal count dismissed despite alternative finding on validity — Acquittal entered<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Proof of impairment — Criminal Code, s. 320.14(1)(a) — Whether impairment proved beyond a reasonable doubt — Evidence relied on for demand fell short of establishing impairment — Remaining indicia limited to admission of drinking and odour of alcohol — Reasonable doubt found — Acquittal entered<br />Evidence — Video recordings — Dash camera, body worn camera, breath room recordings — Whether objective video evidence undermined officers’ observations of unsteadiness, turn signal use, and slurred speech — Accent distinguished from slurred speech — Reliability concerns with unsupported observations — Crown evidence weakened by recordings — Acquittal entered -
2026-09-02 Brampton (City) v. Wright, 2026 ONCJ 525 (CanLII)
Key Words: Criminal and statutory offences — Provincial offences — Strict liability — Dog Owners’ Liability Act, s. 5.1(a), s. 18(1) — Whether “owner” failed to exercise reasonable precautions to prevent biting or attacking — Credibility, video-recording and photographs supporting actus reus — Due diligence and mistake of fact not proven on balance of probabilities — Convictions entered<br />Evidence — Confessions rule — Voluntariness — Whether animal services officer required to caution before obtaining oral and written statements — Operating mind and absence of caution considered, R. v. Oickle, R. v. Jagrup Singh — Inculpatory utterances and written witness statement not considered or given weight — Convictions entered<br />Statutory interpretation — Interpretation of “attack” — Dog Owners’ Liability Act, s. 5.1(a) — Whether barking, running after, chasing, jumping on, or circling pedestrians constitutes “attacking a person” — Dictionary meaning and Martin v. Hurst reviewed — Facts found to meet definition of “attacking” — Convictions entered<br />Evidence — Opinion evidence — Ordinary witness — Whether supervisor trained to identify dog bites could opine injuries in photographs were dog bites — Lay opinion principles and Mohan framework discussed — Training and detailed description accepted, corroborated by video-recording and witness testimony — Convictions entered