Fail to Comply Lawyers Toronto: Breach of Bail Conditions

Two things happen. You can be charged with a new criminal offence under section 145 of the Criminal Code, and the release you are already on can be cancelled, which may put you back in custody until a new bail hearing. Police can arrest you for a breach, release you again on a fresh order, or issue an appearance notice for the new charge.

Yes. Failing to comply with a condition of a release order is an offence under section 145(5) of the Criminal Code, and failing to comply with a police undertaking is an offence under section 145(4). Both are hybrid offences carrying up to two years in jail on indictment. That is true even if the conduct itself — being out after a curfew, taking a drink — would otherwise be perfectly lawful.

To convict someone of failing to comply with bail, the Crown must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that:

1. The accused was legally bound to follow the bail condition.
2. The accused breached that condition.
3. The accused breached the condition knowingly or recklessly.

The Supreme Court of Canada confirmed in R v Zora, 2020 SCC 14 that the fault element is subjective: the Crown has to prove the accused breached the condition knowingly or recklessly, and recklessness means the accused was aware that carrying on created a substantial and unjustified risk of breaching.

Failing to comply with a release order or an undertaking carries a maximum of two years in jail on indictment, or, if the Crown proceeds summarily, up to two years less a day, a fine of up to $5,000, or both. There is no mandatory minimum. Breaching a probation order (section 733.1) or a peace bond (section 811) carries a higher maximum of four years on indictment.

Yes. Most breach investigations start with a report from a complainant, a neighbour, a bail supervisor or a police compliance check. A report is not proof. The Crown still has to prove the condition existed, that you broke it, and that you did so knowingly or recklessly — and where the only evidence is one person’s account, that can be difficult.

Courts sometimes accept a reasonable excuse, such as leaving home to seek urgent medical care. If the court accepts the explanation, the accused will not be convicted.

The law on who has to prove the excuse has changed. The section used to say the accused had to prove a lawful excuse, and older material — including an earlier version of this page — said the burden lies on the accused on a balance of probabilities. Parliament removed those words from section 145 in 2019, and the Supreme Court held in R v Zora that a lawful excuse is a separate defence which does not change the Crown’s burden to prove every element of the offence beyond a reasonable doubt. Speak to a lawyer about how the excuse should be put forward in your case.

Not necessarily. Even if you believe you breached your bail, the prosecutor may lack sufficient evidence. Common weaknesses include:

• Missing or unreliable police or civilian witnesses
• Lack of the original bail documents to prove you were bound by the condition

Pleading guilty without reviewing disclosure with a defence lawyer can result in jail time and reduce your chances of obtaining bail in the future. Always consult with a lawyer before deciding how to proceed.

In some cases, police discover bail breaches through illegal stops, searches, or detentions. If police violated your Charter rights, your lawyer can ask the court to exclude the evidence. Without this evidence, the prosecutor may be unable to prove the charge.

• Challenging intent: Showing the breach was accidental.
• Reasonable excuse: Proving necessity, such as a medical emergency.
• Insufficient evidence: Highlighting gaps in the Crown’s case.
• Charter applications: Excluding illegally obtained evidence.

Each case is unique, so the right strategy depends on the facts and disclosure.

• Immediate penalties: Possible jail sentence, probation, or stricter release conditions.
• Future bail hearings: Judges often refuse bail if you have a past conviction for failing to comply.
• Criminal record: A permanent record can affect employment, immigration, and travel.

A criminal record in Ontario follows you into job applications, licensing decisions, immigration proceedings and travel to the United States.

Where a release order is cancelled under section 524 of the Criminal Code, the onus is on you: you stay in custody unless you show cause why detention is not justified by clearly demonstrating that your proposed release plan addresses the risks. That standard was introduced by the Bail and Sentencing Reform Act, in force on 15 July 2026. Being charged with a breach committed while already released also reverses the onus at a fresh bail hearing under section 515(6)(c).

Often, yes, and it is usually the better answer. With the consent of the prosecutor and the accused, a court can vacate or vary a release order at any time before sentence under section 523(2)(c). If consent is refused, a judge of the Superior Court can review the order under section 520 on two clear days’ notice and can hear fresh evidence. The Supreme Court said in R v Zora that conditions are only reasonable if they can realistically be met, so a condition that is setting you up to fail is a condition worth applying to change.

Failing to comply with bail falls under administration of justice offences. These include charges such as:

• Failing to Attend Court
• Failing to Comply with Probation
• Failing to Comply with a Peace Bond

Courts take these charges seriously because they involve disregarding court orders. They are also the charges most often resolved without a conviction, through a judicial referral hearing under section 523.1 or a variation of the condition that caused the problem.