Family and Matrimonial

When the Supreme Court of Canada established the new tort of intimate partner violence (“IPV”) in Ahluwalia v. Ahluwalia,[1] it answered a call to action to address and provide a remedy to the coercion, control, and systemic harm that results from this pervasive form of abuse. In the wake of the decision, family and civil lawyers now have to figure out how to effectively litigate these cases. How should they be pleaded? What evidence will courts find persuasive? How much corroboration is necessary?

The Supreme Court of Canada has established a new tort for intimate partner violence, extending legal recognition beyond physical abuse to include psychological control, financial manipulation, and other coercive tactics. Understanding who can sue, what conduct qualifies, and how courts will assess damages is essential for anyone navigating this emerging area of law.

Une fiducie familiale constituée par un parent après le mariage de son enfant serait normalement considérée comme un don fait après le mariage (gift after marriage) et, à ce titre, exclue du calcul de l’égalisation en vertu de la Loi sur le droit de la famille de l’Ontario. Dans l’affaire Lang-Newlands c. Newlands, 2026 ONCA 530 (« Lang-Newlands »), la Cour d’appel de l’Ontario (la « Cour ») en décide toutefois autrement. Elle conclut que, puisque la valeur de la fiducie provenait entièrement d’actions que la bénéficiaire détenait déjà à la date du mariage, son intérêt dans la fiducie ne constituait pas un don. Elle est donc désormais tenue de verser une importante somme au titre de l’égalisation.

As families, investments and business interests increasingly span multiple countries, it is not uncommon for Canadian residents to have dual citizenship and property in several jurisdictions. Where a Canadian resident individual who holds dual Canadian-U.S. citizenship owns assets in several countries, multiple wills are often recommended, with a separate will for each jurisdiction administered by a local executor.

When a trusted attorney abuses their authority under a power of attorney, family members often wonder if removal is possible. Ontario courts have the power to remove attorneys, but only with strong evidence of misconduct and when removal serves the incapable person's best interests.

Comme les familles, les investissements et les intérêts commerciaux sont de plus en plus souvent répartis dans plus d’un pays, il n’est pas rare que des résidents canadiens possèdent la double citoyenneté et des biens dans plusieurs territoires.

Crypto in divorce in Canada presents unique hurdles for couples managing Bitcoin, Ethereum, and other digital assets amid separation.

That deceptively simple question drove four to five days of Superior Court litigation in Ontario…all funded by Canadian taxpayers, in what hosts Gavin Tighe and Stephen Thiele call one of the most revealing windows into the mounting crisis of judicial resource allocation in Canada.

For many business owners, the company is their largest asset. In an Ontario divorce, the business itself is usually not divided between spouses, but its value can have a major impact on the equalization payment that one spouse may owe the other.