Décisions de la Cour

Une série de jugements de la Cour de justice de l’Ontario, pour la plupart rendus après le 1er avril 2004, sont affichés sur le site Web de CanLII. Ce site n’est pas une source exhaustive de jugements de la Cour de justice de l’Ontario. La version officielle des motifs de jugement est le document original signé ou l’endossement manuscrit dans le dossier de la Cour. S’il y a une question concernant le contenu d’un jugement, le document original dans le dossier de la Cour l’emporte.

Jugements ne sont disponibles que dans la langue dans laquelle ils ont été rédigés.

On peut obtenir des copies des jugements de la Cour de justice de l’Ontario en contactant les greffes respectifs. Des frais de photocopie sont requis. Les adresses et les numéros de téléphone de certains tribunaux sont disponibles sur le site web du ministère du procureur général. On peut consulter ces jugements en s’abonnant à un service comme LexisNexisMD, QuicklawMC et WestlawNextMD Canada.

Abonnez-vous au fil de nouvelles RSS afin de consulter les décisions

Cour de justice de l’Ontario – décisions récentes

  • 2026-04-09 R. v. Da Rosa, 2026 ONCJ 207 (CanLII)
    Key Words: Criminal and statutory offences — Sentencing — Fraud under $5,000 — Fit sentence for two counts of fraud contrary to s. 380(1) — Impersonation of licensed paralegal undermining confidence in administration of justice — Denunciation and deterrence prioritized under s. 718 — Proportionality applied per Parranto — Six months on each count concurrent, followed by probation — Custodial sentence imposed<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Sentencing — Conditional sentence orders — Whether conditional sentence order available and appropriate under s. 742.1 — Community safety and consistency with ss. 718 to 718.2 assessed — Real risk of reoffending per Proulx, para. 69 — Service in community would be contrary to sentencing purpose and principles — Conditional sentence order refused<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Sentencing — Aggravating and mitigating factors — Abuse of position of trust and impact on victims under s. 718.2(a)(iii) and (iii.1) — Mental health evidence considered with no causal connection per Lojovic — Potentially harsher incarceration impact noted per Purvis — Guilty plea and remorse attenuated — High moral culpability found — Sentence increased within range — Custodial sentence maintained<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Sentencing — Consecutive or concurrent sentences — Applicability of totality under s. 718.2(c) and consecutive authority under s. 718.3(4)(b)(i) — Distinct wrongs considered with Al‑Enzi — Whether consecutive sentences warranted for multiple offences — Totality satisfied by concurrent terms — Restitution ordered under s. 738(1)(a) — Concurrent sentences ordered and restitution made
  • 2026-04-09 R. v. Spence-Branagh, 2026 ONCJ 210 (CanLII)
    Key Words: Criminal and statutory offences — Assault — Proof beyond a reasonable doubt — Whether Crown proved assault under s. 266 — Complainant’s account marked by internal inconsistencies and inaccuracies — Delay in statement and lack of cooperation considered — Corroboration by injuries and 911 calls assessed against reliability concerns — Reasonable doubt persists — Accused acquitted on assault<br />Evidence — Credibility and reliability — Domestic context — Whether complainant’s inconsistencies, intoxication, and delayed reporting undermine reliability — Absence of proven motive to fabricate not determinative — Spontaneous utterances to front desk and 911 call weighed — Conflicting accounts about stairs, elevator, and barricading examined — Complainant’s evidence found unreliable<br />Evidence — Corroboration — Injuries and eyewitness observations — Whether corroborating evidence overcomes reliability deficits — Blood observed by witnesses and police accepted — Hallway “towering” and argument heard lacked direct observation of blows — Prior inconsistent statement about falling on stairs considered — Corroboration insufficient to prove assault — Conviction not supported<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Breach of probation — Failure to keep the peace, s. 733.1(1) — Whether breach established where committal depended on assault — Crown conceded breach turned on assault count — Assault not proven beyond a reasonable doubt — Breach charge cannot stand — Accused acquitted on breach
  • 2026-04-09 Homeward v. Miller, 2026 ONCJ 213 (CanLII)
    Key Words: Family — Child support — Variation — Material change threshold — Whether either party established a material change since the existing final order under Colucci v. Colucci, 2021 SCC 24 — Existing order grounded in minimum-wage imputation — Evidentiary onus not met to revisit final order — No effective date determination required — Motion to change and cross‑motion dismissed<br />Family — Income determination — Student grants — Whether OSAP grants should be included in income and grossed‑up for child‑support purposes — Grants tax‑free, recurrent, used for living expenses — Mwenda v. Matituka, 2018 ONCJ 503, applied in Fiorenza v. Mitic, 2024 ONCJ 467 and K.H.S. v. K.S., 2025 ONCJ 436 — Inclusion considered but no material change in earning capacity — Support order unchanged<br />Family — Imputation of income — Minimum wage — Whether continued imputation of at least minimum‑wage earning capacity remains appropriate — Evidence of job‑search efforts thin and unparticularized — Schooling not shown to reduce support where income already imputed — Capacity to earn minimum wage not disproved — No upward variation established — Variation refused
  • 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
Cour de justice de l’Ontario