Canada’s Top Court Recognizes Intimate Partner Violence Tort

The Supreme Court of Canada has recognized a new civil tort for intimate partner violence.

The Supreme Court of Canada has, for the first time, recognized intimate partner violence as a distinct civil wrong. The ruling in Ahluwalia v. Ahluwalia creates a new common law tort focused on coercive and controlling conduct within intimate relationships.

• The majority opinion, written by Justice Nicholas Kasirer, defines this violence as conduct undermining autonomy—ranging from isolation and manipulation to economic abuse and intimidation.
• To establish liability, a plaintiff must prove the abuse occurred in the context of an intimate relationship (or its aftermath), the defendant intentionally engaged in it, and the conduct was coercive control.
• The case centered on Kuldeep Kaur Ahluwalia and physical and emotional abuse suffered throughout her 16-year marriage. She was awarded $150,000 at trial, a figure later affirmed under the new tort by the Supreme Court, reframing it from "family violence" to "intimate partner violence."
• The Court’s decision was not unanimous (6-3), with dissenting justices arguing that existing torts—such as assault or intentional infliction of emotional distress—were already sufficient.

Justice Kasirer described intimate partner violence as “a pernicious social ill deserving of the full attention of the law.” Angela Marinos, Chief General Counsel at the Raoul Wallenberg Centre for Human Rights, called it “a historic judgment that has changed the landscape of tort law.”

For lawyers, this ruling requires close attention when advising clients in family, personal injury, and civil proceedings—especially regarding coercive, non-physical abuse. As Niki Sharma, British Columbia's Attorney General, noted, “this ruling will make a meaningful difference for survivors.”

Yes, but: The ruling leaves open questions on quantifying damages and applying the tort to non-physical abuse cases.