In May 2026, the Supreme Court of Canada recognized a new tort of Intimate Partner Violence (IPV), addressing patterns of abuse within intimate relationships. This marks a significant development in Canadian law.
Historically, family and tort law often treated abuse as a series of separate physical incidents involving imminent harm. By recognizing intimate partner violence and coercive control, the law now acknowledges that ongoing patterns of psychological abuse and generalized fear of future harm can themselves amount to a legal wrong.
What Is Intimate Partner Violence?
Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) involves coercive or controlling conduct that deprives a person of autonomy, dignity, or equality. It may include physical, sexual, emotional, and financial abuse.
- extreme financial restriction
- constant digital surveillance
- isolation from family and friends
- psychological intimidation
IPV is rarely a single event. More often, it is a sustained pattern of isolation, humiliation, and control. This new tort is important because it seeks to compensate a distinct wrong—coercive control—and the distinct harm it causes, including the loss of autonomy.
What Is a Tort?
A tort is a civil legal claim through which a person seeks damages because someone else caused them harm. In many cases, damages take the form of monetary compensation.
Unlike criminal law, tort law is not intended to punish. Instead, it provides remedies for those who have been harmed, such as compensation or, where possible, restoration to the position they were in before the wrong occurred.
The Landmark Case
In Ahluwalia v Ahluwalia, 2026 SCC 16, the Court held that existing torts—such as assault, battery, and intentional infliction of emotional distress—did not adequately capture the harm caused by coercive and controlling conduct within an intimate relationship. As a result, it recognized a new tort specifically addressing IPV.
The Supreme Court of Canada set out a three-part test for establishing the tort of Intimate Partner Violence:
- The abusive conduct arose within an intimate partnership or in its aftermath.
- The defendant intentionally engaged in that conduct.
- Viewed objectively, the conduct amounted to coercive control, meaning the behaviour as a whole formed a pattern of coercive control.
This decision marks a significant step forward for survivors. It reflects a broader understanding of abuse and creates a clearer path for survivors to seek compensation for the harms they have experienced.
Our Lawyers Can Help
Family law matters can be overwhelming, especially when they involve coercive control or other forms of intimate partner violence. Our team is here to provide guidance and support.
If you are dealing with difficult family law circumstances, you can contact JDLG to book a confidential consultation and discuss your situation with a lawyer.