Decisions

Subscribe to the RSS Feed for Ontario Court of Justice Decisions

• New Decisions : Ontario Court of Justice

Ontario Court of Justice Recent Decisions

• 2026-06-23 R. v. Gill, 2026 ONCJ 360 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Criminal and statutory offences — Sentencing — Fentanyl and cocaine trafficking — Proportionate sentence for lower‑ to mid‑level participant in large‑scale enterprise — Application of proportionality, parity, restraint and rehabilitation — Parranto range and Lynch applied to wholesale fentanyl — Role within hierarchy assessed with Purvis — Global term fixed at 9.5 years — Summers credit applied — DNA order and prohibitions imposed — Sentence imposed<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Sentencing — Pre‑sentence custody conditions — Do unusually harsh conditions warrant a quantifiable Duncan credit or mitigation only? — Brown and Marshall preference for treating conditions as mitigating factor — Lockdowns and triple bunking considered — Transparency versus disproportionate weighting addressed — Conditions accepted as mitigating without precise numerical deduction — Sentence adjusted within proportionality — Mitigation applied<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Sentencing — State misconduct — Is a further reduction justified under Nasogaluak absent a full evidentiary record? — Alleged strip searches and restrictions on religious expression — Insufficient particulars or institutional records filed — Legitimate institutional purposes recognised — No Charter breach determined or reduction warranted — Complaints do not establish state misconduct — No additional credit granted<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Sentencing — Firearms and totality — Should s. 95(1) firearm sentence be consecutive to drug sentences? — Graham and Crevier recognise consecutive approach for guns and drugs — Totality principle applied to avoid a crushing sentence — Youth, first offender status and rehabilitation prospects weighed — Firearm term ordered concurrent with 9.5‑year drug sentence — Global sentence maintained as proportionate — Concurrent sentence ordered
• 2026-06-23 R. v. Singh, 2026 ONCJ 377 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Criminal and statutory offences — Sentencing — Theft under and breach of probation — Organized, targeted and brazen LCBO thefts while bound by probation — Fitness of sentence assessed with totality and parity — Whether 90 days is unhinged from the reality of the situation — Impact on LCBO and residents of Ontario emphasized — Sentence of 12 months imposed<br />Procedure — Joint submissions — Anthony‑Cook framework — Whether 90‑day joint submission would bring the administration of justice into disrepute — Demonstrably unfit sentence as condition precedent — No redeeming factors such as weaknesses in Crown’s case or assistance — Parity and totality considered — Joint submission rejected<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Sentencing principles — Totality and parity — Appropriate sentence for planned, organized and targeted thefts — Breach of probation as aggravating circumstance — Post‑offence convictions considered for totality and rehabilitative prospects — Ordinary LCBO theft range inapplicable — Sentence increased to 12 months<br />Citizenship and immigration — Collateral consequences — Deportation and sentencing — Can deportation mitigate sentence where accused is without status under a deportation order? — Deportation not a collateral or pragmatic factor on these facts — Factual prospect of removal not established despite existing order — Mitigating effect of immigration consequences denied
• 2026-06-23 Niijaansinaanik Child and Family Services v. T.L., P.D., 2026 ONCJ 378 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Child protection — Party status — Foster parents — Whether foster parents should be added as parties — Long-term continuous caregiving since infancy considered — Best interests of the child at forefront — Alignment with society, HIFN and OCL noted — Trial efficiency and disclosure management addressed — Court discretion under r. 7(5) exercised — Party status granted<br />Statutory interpretation — Federal Act — Care provider — Does “care provider” in s. 13 include foster parents — Text, scheme and purpose analysed per Rizzo & Rizzo Shoes — Reference re An Act respecting First Nations, Inuit and Métis children, youth and families, 2024 SCC 5 considered — Distinction between family or community and state-created placements — Automatic party status denied<br />Procedure — Family Law Rules — Adding parties — Should foster parents be added under r. 7(5) — Factors from Children’s Aid Society of London and Middlesex v. H. S. applied — Ability to present and challenge evidence assessed — No undue delay to scheduled trial — Legal interest in potential outcomes recognized — Party status granted<br />Procedure — Participation rights — Non-party participation — Scope of participation under CYFSA s. 79(3) — What level of participation best serves the child’s interests — Access to full disclosure balanced with privacy — Trial management to prevent prejudice to parents — Need for current, relevant caregiving evidence emphasized — Enhanced participation required — Party status granted<br />Indigenous peoples — Child and family services — Federal Act purposes — Whether adding foster parents frustrates cultural continuity and Indigenous jurisdiction — Overrepresentation context and reconciliation aims considered — Hierarchy of placement preserved and governance role respected — Discretionary participation consistent with best interests and substantive equality — Party status granted
• 2026-06-23 R. v. Caschera, 2026 ONCJ 379 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Criminal and statutory offences — Impaired operation — Drugs — Criminal Code, s. 320.14(1)(a) — Whether the Crown proved impairment to any degree beyond a reasonable doubt — Driving observations limited and time uncertain — SFST and DIE observations considered with toxicology — Reliance on Stellato for threshold of impairment — Minimal driving evidence and inconsistencies raise doubt — Acquittal entered<br />Evidence — Toxicology — Expert testimony — Whether the toxicology report and expert evidence established impairment or supported a reasonable doubt — Cocaine and benzoylecgonine detected, buprenorphine at therapeutic or below ranges — Active versus crash phase explained — Expert unable to opine on impairment at time of driving — Evidence consistent with fatigue alternative — Reasonable doubt maintained<br />Evidence — Police investigation — SFST and DRE — What weight should be given to SFST and DRE observations where the video was not tendered and drug-class opinions were inconsistent with toxicology — Observations of drowsiness and restricted pupils — Opinion of narcotic analgesic and cannabis impairment inconsistent with results — Video blind spots and non-tendering limit assessment — Weight reduced — Acquittal maintained
• 2026-06-22 Toronto (City) v. Lewis, 2026 ONCJ 376 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Statutory interpretation — Defences — Absolute liability — Can a “public interest defence” be read into HTA s. 78.1(1)? — Offence characterised as absolute liability — Exemptions in s. 78.1(4) and Ontario Regulation 366/09 considered — Court declines to rewrite legislation — Legislative choice left to Provincial Legislature — Appeal dismissed<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Provincial offences — Exemptions — Do HTA s. 78.1(4) exemptions and s. 78.1(6) parked conditions apply at a red light? — Driver not lawfully parked and vehicle in traffic — Not a prescribed person or class under O Reg 366/09 — Holding device while driving established — Conviction upheld<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Elements — Use while driving — Does being stopped at a red light excuse holding a device? — Meaning of “holding” affirmed from R. v. Kazemi — Stopped at a red light remains driving — York v. Cong and Lukic cited — Undivided attention to driving required — Appeal dismissed<br />Procedure — Appeals — Provincial Offences Act s. 138(1) — Should conviction be set aside to satisfy the ends of justice? — Trial reasons meticulous and thorough — Findings of fact reasonable — No error of law identified — Discretion to intervene not engaged — Appeal dismissed