Domestic violence

The decision concerns the conviction of Kayani As-Sadiq for assault, threatening death, aggravated assault, and related offences against his former wife, Marie-Lyne Toussaint.

The court found the complainant credible and her account corroborated by independent evidence and post-offence conduct.

The court rejected the accused’s alibi and alternative explanations, finding them improbable and unsupported by the evidence.

The court acquitted the accused of attempted murder, finding a reasonable doubt as to intent to kill, but convicted him of the included offence of aggravated assault.

The appellant, Jude Thangarajah, sought an extension of time to file a notice of appeal from his 2017 convictions and to seek leave to appeal his sentence.

The Court of Appeal for Ontario dismissed the motion, finding that Mr. Thangarajah did not form a timely intention to appeal, failed to adequately explain the lengthy delay, and did not demonstrate arguable grounds of appeal.

The court also found that granting the extension would prejudice the Crown and the administration of justice, and emphasized the importance of finality for the complainant and the public.

This decision follows a 13-day trial regarding the breakdown of a six-year marriage with no children, focusing on property division and damages arising from domestic violence.

The court addresses claims for constructive and resulting trusts, the characterization of family advances as loans or gifts, equalization of net family property, post-separation adjustments, and damages for family violence.

The court finds that the applicant is entitled to a 50% interest in both properties by way of constructive trust, that certain family advances were loans and others gifts, and awards damages for family violence.

A permanent restraining order is also granted.

This case involves a status review application by the Catholic Children’s Aid Society of Toronto seeking extended society care for three young children (B, C, and D) with no access to their parents, JM and MH.

The court reviewed extensive evidence including Statements of Agreed Facts, police and hospital records, and testimony from society workers, foster parents, and the parents themselves.

The children have special needs, including autism for B, and have been in care beyond statutory time limits.

The parents have a history of instability, mental health issues, substance abuse, domestic violence, and lack of cooperation with the society.

The court found the parents neither credible nor reliable and concluded that returning the children to their care would pose significant risks.

The court ordered extended society care with no parental access but allowed access among the siblings.

The decision carefully applies the legal framework under the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017, including the best interests of the child and the new access test for children in extended society care.

This decision addresses a child protection application under the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017, involving two young children found to be in need of protection due to risks of physical harm and exposure to family violence.

The court carefully analyzed the mental health challenges of the mother, the domestic violence between the parents, and the suitability of placement with the maternal aunt.

The court found the mother lacked insight and compliance with treatment, and the father had a history of family violence.

The children were placed in the care of the maternal aunt with supervision by the Children’s Aid Society of Toronto, and access orders were made for the parents with conditions.

The judgment also provides a detailed roadmap for the parents to address the protection concerns and work towards reunification.

The appellant, Jason Windebank, appealed his designation as a Dangerous Offender and the imposition of an indeterminate sentence following convictions for violent offences against his domestic partner.

The Court of Appeal for Ontario dismissed the appeal, finding that the sentencing judge’s errors were immaterial, that Gladue principles were sufficiently considered, and that the judge properly exercised her discretion in imposing an indeterminate sentence.

The Ontario Court of Justice granted summary judgment in favour of the Children’s Aid Society of the Region of Peel, placing three children in extended society care due to chronic and long-standing child protection concerns including domestic violence, parental substance abuse, and mental health issues.

The court emphasized the children’s expressed wishes not to return to parental care, the lack of meaningful progress despite years of intervention, and the need for permanency and closure.

The decision carefully applied the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017, and the principles from Hryniak v. Mauldin regarding summary judgment, underscoring the cautious approach required in child protection cases.

This decision addresses a 35-year marital history between Lana Morris and Joseph Morris, culminating in their separation and subsequent family law litigation.

The court resolves complex property, equalization, and tort claims, including the valuation and division of pensions, vehicles, and business assets, as well as claims for damages arising from domestic violence.

The court finds that the parties were not living separate and apart during the disputed years, includes the value of the NH pension in the equalization calculation, and awards general and aggravated damages for tortious conduct.

The court also grants a permanent restraining order and provides detailed directions on costs.

The Ontario Court of Justice sentenced S.T. to 8 months imprisonment for sexual assault of his spouse, with additional consecutive and concurrent sentences totaling 30 days for breaches of court orders.

The court considered aggravating factors including the violation of a position of trust, persistence despite victim resistance, and the significant psychological impact on the victim.

Mitigating factors included S.T.'s lack of prior record, remorse for breaches, employment history, and harsh pre-sentence custody conditions.

The court rejected a conditional sentence due to concerns about compliance and the seriousness of the offence.

A 10-year SOIRA order, DNA order, and a 10-year weapons prohibition were also imposed.

This sentencing decision addresses serious domestic violence offences committed by K.B., who pleaded guilty to multiple counts including assault, assault with choking, threatening to damage property, threatening death, and theft.

The offender has a significant prior record for domestic violence offences in Alberta, including sexual assault and assault with a weapon, and had been paroled for over five years before reoffending.

The court carefully balanced aggravating factors such as the severity and multiplicity of offences and prior record, with mitigating factors including guilty pleas, harsh pre-sentence custody conditions, remorse, and community support.

The total sentence imposed was 30 months imprisonment, with credit for 337 days pre-sentence custody and Summers credit, followed by a three-year probation order with strict conditions including no contact with the victim and mandatory counselling.

This decision addresses the credibility assessment in a criminal trial involving three assault charges arising from incidents between separated spouses living in the same house.

The court carefully analyzes conflicting testimonies and an audio recording secretly made by the accused.

The judge finds the complainant credible and the accused's evidence undermined by the recording, resulting in convictions on two counts of assault under section 266 of the Criminal Code, while one count is dismissed due to insufficient proof of bodily harm.

The court considered whether Mohamed Siad should be designated a dangerous offender following a series of violent offences, primarily against intimate partners and family members.

After reviewing Siad’s history of escalating violence, repeated breaches of court orders, failed attempts at rehabilitation, and psychiatric evidence, the court found that Siad’s conduct was intractable and that he posed a high risk of future violence.

The court designated Siad a dangerous offender and imposed a global sentence of five years’ incarceration (after credit for pretrial custody), followed by a seven-year long-term supervision order, with ancillary orders including DNA and weapons prohibitions.

This decision addresses the credibility and reliability assessments in a sexual assault trial involving intimate partners, W.O. and M.M., who were married for 25 years and both served in the Canadian military.

The accused faced multiple charges of sexual assault and one count of assault.

The trial judge carefully applied the W.(D.) framework to evaluate conflicting testimonies, considering medical conditions, memory issues, and inconsistencies in the complainant's evidence.

The judge found the accused not guilty of the sexual assault charges due to reasonable doubt and credibility concerns but convicted him of a minor assault causing injury to the complainant's hand during a physical altercation over trailer keys.

The court determined the date of separation and whether a property was a matrimonial home in a family law dispute.

The applicant claimed separation occurred in 2007 and sought a declaration that the Madawaska property was a matrimonial home.

The respondent argued separation occurred in 2002 and that the property was not a matrimonial home.

After reviewing the evidence, including credibility assessments and the parties’ living arrangements, the court found the parties separated in December 2002 and that the Madawaska property was not a matrimonial home.

The court ordered the removal of the matrimonial home designation from the property’s title.

This decision concerns a high-conflict family law matter involving allegations of domestic violence, parental alienation, and the best interests of two children, A.G. and S.G., following the separation of Maryana Chyher and Amar Al Jaboury.

The court reviews extensive evidence, including expert parenting assessments, police and child protection reports, and the children's own views and preferences.

The court finds that Mr. Al Jaboury engaged in coercive and controlling behaviour and alienated the children from their mother.

Ultimately, the court orders a shared parenting regime to commence March 1, 2025, with Ms. Chyher having sole decision-making authority (except for religion in each parent's home), and sets out detailed provisions for parenting time, communication, travel, and costs.

The court sentenced K. M. Thauhidul Islam for the attempted murder of his wife, as well as for prior assaults and breaches of court orders.

The decision details the circumstances of the offences, the impact on the victims, and the aggravating and mitigating factors.

The court imposed a global sentence of 17 years, less pre-sentence custody, and made ancillary orders including a DNA order, weapons prohibition, and non-communication order.

The applicant, Jennifer Lynn Hodgson, brought an emergency ex parte motion seeking a restraining order and related relief against the respondent, Shane Jason Hodgson, in the context of family law proceedings.

The court granted a temporary no contact order under section 28 of the Children’s Law Reform Act, finding that the applicant had established urgency and risk of serious consequences if notice were given.

The court declined to grant a restraining order at this stage, reserving the issue for a later hearing.

The order included specific restrictions on contact and proximity, and set a return date for further review.

This trial concerned parenting and child support arrangements for the parties' four-year-old child.

The mother sought primary residence and sole decision-making, and child support.

The father sought primary residence and sole decision-making, and no child support.

The court found it in the child's best interests to be in the primary care of the father with sole decision-making responsibility, citing the mother's emotional fragility, contempt for the father, unwillingness to cooperate, and attempts to alienate the child from the father.

The court also imputed income to the father for retroactive child support from the date of separation but terminated ongoing child support due to the father having primary residence and not seeking support from the mother.

The Respondent Father brought a motion to change a temporary order, seeking to expand his parenting time from supervised to unsupervised.

The Applicant Mother consented to expanded time but opposed unsupervised access until specific conditions related to the Father's sobriety and transparency were met, citing his history of domestic violence and alcohol misuse.

The court found a material change in circumstances, but, considering the Father's past conduct and lack of full transparency regarding recent sobriety lapses, ordered a cautious, gradual expansion of supervised parenting time, including a phase for community access, but denied immediate unsupervised access.

The Father was ordered to continue various sobriety programs and provide ongoing disclosure.

The accused, T.M., was charged with multiple counts of assault and sexual assault against R.G., and one count of assault against E.M. The trial focused on the credibility and reliability of the complainant, R.G., and the accused, T.M., applying the W.D. analysis.

The court found R.G.'s evidence to be inconsistent and unreliable, noting her animus towards T.M. and delayed, inconsistent disclosures.

The court believed T.M.'s denials and found him not guilty on all charges.