Criminal Harassment Lawyers Toronto

Criminal harassment is the Criminal Code offence commonly called stalking. It covers repeatedly following or communicating with someone, monitoring them, watching their home or workplace, or threatening conduct toward them or anyone or any animal they know, without lawful authority, where the conduct could reasonably be expected to make them believe their safety is threatened.

For conduct on or after July 18, 2026, the Crown must prove that the accused engaged in prohibited conduct under section 264(2), without lawful authority, intending to harass or knowing or reckless about whether the conduct would harass, and that the conduct could reasonably be expected to make the person believe their safety, or the safety of anyone known to them, was threatened. Safety includes psychological safety.

For conduct before July 18, 2026, the former wording applies, and the Ontario Court of Appeal’s five elements from R v Kosikar (1999) govern:

1) In order to prove a criminal harassment allegation in court, it must be proven that the accused person has engaged any of the following conduct:

• repeatedly following the complainant or someone known to the complainant;
• repeatedly communicating with the complainant or someone known to the complainant (either directly or indirectly);
• watching or besetting a place where the complainant or someone known to the complainant lives, works, carries on business or "happens to be"; or
• Employing "threatening conduct" towards the complainant or a member of the complainant's family.

2) It must be established that the complainant was harassed;

3) It must be established that the accused who engaged in such conduct knew that the complainant was harassed or was reckless or willfully blind as to whether the complainant was harassed;

4) It must be established that the conduct caused the complainant to fear for her safety or the safety of anyone known to her; and

5) It must be established that the complainant's fear was, in all of the circumstances, reasonable.

The prosecutor doesn't need to prove that the complainant was actually threatened, or that any actual injury – either physical or mental – was caused to the complainant as a result of the accused person's conduct.

Under the 2026 wording the Crown does not even have to prove that the person actually felt afraid, only that the conduct could reasonably be expected to make them believe their safety was threatened.

"Repeatedly" means "many times over", specifically more than once or twice. The conduct must be overly frequent in all the circumstances. Whether the conduct is overly frequent is a matter of fact to be determined by the court on a case by case basis. There is no hard and fast rule as to what will in every case, numerically at least, constitute conduct which is overly frequent.

Watching or besetting and threatening conduct do not have to be repeated. In R v Kosikar the Court of Appeal held that a single threatening letter, read against years of earlier unwanted contact, was enough.

"Harassment" means the conduct must be unwelcome to the complainant, and includes an element of tormenting the complainant; engaging in a course of vexatious comment or conduct that is known or ought reasonably to be known to be unwelcome.

The Ontario Court of Appeal adopted the description of being harassed as being “tormented, troubled, worried continually or chronically, plagued, bedeviled and badgered”, and not merely “vexed, disquieted or annoyed”.

The test for reasonable fear on the part of the complainant involves an inquiry into whether a reasonable person, in the particular circumstances of the complainant, would fear for his or her safety or the safety of anyone known to him or her.

In considering whether the complainant's fears are reasonably held, the court must take into consideration the complainant's gender, and the history and circumstances surrounding the prior relationship between the accused and the complainant.

Those passages describe the test under the former wording. The 2026 wording asks the same kind of question, whether the conduct could reasonably be expected, in all the circumstances, to make that person believe their safety was threatened, so the history between the two people remains central.

It can be. Repeated calls or messages are prohibited conduct under section 264(2)(b), but they are only criminal harassment if the other elements are also proven: no lawful authority, an intent to harass or knowledge or recklessness about it, and a reasonable threat to the person’s safety. Repeated messages sent with intent to harass can also be charged as harassing communications under section 372(3), which carries up to two years.

Yes. Since July 18, 2026 section 264 says expressly that the conduct can happen in person, by telecommunication or by any other means, and monitoring someone’s location, movements, actions or social interactions is now prohibited conduct in its own right. If intimate images are shared, or a person threatens to share them, a separate charge under section 162.1 can follow, with a maximum of 10 years. Read more about intimate image charges.

The Criminal Code specifically requires that the harassment be without "lawful authority". Therefore, if someone has a lawful reason to contact another person such as to enforce a civil debt or family court order etc., they would not be guilty of criminal harassment.

Other defences challenge whether the conduct was repeated, whether the accused meant to harass or knew the contact was unwelcome, whether it could reasonably threaten anyone’s safety, and who actually sent the messages. See how we defend these charges.

Only the Crown can withdraw a criminal charge; a complainant cannot drop it. Charges are withdrawn when the evidence does not support them, often after the defence shows the full message history or the context. A common resolution is a peace bond under section 810, which ends the charge with no criminal record.

Yes. A person who fears on reasonable grounds that someone will injure them, their intimate partner or child, or damage their property, can apply for a peace bond under section 810. The court can order the other person to keep the peace for up to 12 months with conditions such as no contact. Peace bonds are also used to resolve criminal harassment charges. Read more about peace bonds.

A person convicted of criminal harassment could face up to 10 years in prison. A conviction for criminal harassment may also lead to a criminal record, fines, probation and/or a restraining order being placed against them not to contact the victim of the harassment. In some cases, it is possible to avoid jail even if a person is found guilty of criminal harassment.

On a summary prosecution the maximum is two years less a day and a $5,000 fine. Where violence was used, threatened or attempted against an intimate partner, the Crown can now charge the harassment under section 263.1, raising the maximum to 14 years; the same step-up applies where the offence is motivated by hatred. Every conviction or discharge also brings a mandatory weapons prohibition.

Jail is possible, but not automatic. In some cases, it is possible to avoid jail even if a person is found guilty of criminal harassment, through a discharge, probation or a conditional sentence served in the community. The history of the conduct, any breach of an order, and whether it involved an intimate partner all push a sentence higher.

Canada does not use the word felony. Criminal harassment is a hybrid offence: the Crown can proceed by indictment, the closest equivalent to a felony, with a maximum of 10 years, or summarily.

Read more about coercive control, a related domestic charge created by Bill C-16 that often overlaps with intimate-partner allegations. The new offence, section 264.01, does not come into force until June 18, 2028.

Criminal harassment charges often arrive with, or overlap, these charges:

• Domestic Assault: Often connected to criminal harassment charges.
• Assault: Frequently charged alongside harassment allegations.
• Distributing an Intimate Image: Sometimes overlaps with harassment in domestic situations.
• Mischief: Related or overlapping conduct under criminal law.
• Bail Hearings: We handle bail hearings and detention reviews for all criminal charges.
• Criminal Appeals: Learn more about how you can appeal your conviction or sentence.
• Uttering Threats: Threats often form part of a harassment allegation.
• Peace Bonds: A common way to resolve harassment allegations.