Skip to main content 
Police can enter your home in only three ways: with your permission, with a warrant, or under a narrow exception the law recognizes, such as hot pursuit or an emergency that puts someone’s life or safety at risk. Anyone, police included, may walk up to your door and knock. Beyond the door, officers who have no warrant and no exception are there only as long as you allow it, and must leave when you tell them to.
The ruling of R. v. Zargar, 2014 ONSC 1415 affirms that police cannot generally enter a person’s home without permission except under very limited circumstances. The case also establishes that a person can use a reasonable amount of physical force to remove a police officer who is trespassing on their private property. That second point comes with real risk, explained below.
- The general rule
- Permission or legal authorityConsent, a warrant, or a recognized exception
- The Charter
- Section 8The right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure
- To arrest someone inside
- A warrant to enterCriminal Code ss. 529 and 529.1, after R v Feeney
- If police break the rules
- Evidence can be excludedCharter s. 24(2), applying R v Grant
How far can police go without your permission?
Four stages from the sidewalk to your living room, and what police need at each one.
The Supreme Court of Canada recognized the implied licence to knock in R v Evans, [1996] 1 SCR 8, and restated it in March 2026 in R v Singer, 2026 SCC 8: the occupier is taken to invite members of the public on legitimate business, including police, to approach the door and knock, so that they can communicate with whoever lives there. A conversation at the door, without more, is not a search. But the licence ends at the door, it covers only that communicative purpose, and it can be rebutted or revoked at any time by a clear expression of intent.
Police who go further become intruders. In Evans, officers who knocked in order to smell for marijuana were conducting a search. In R v Le, 2019 SCC 34, officers who walked into a fenced backyard were trespassers from the moment they entered, and the Supreme Court excluded the evidence and entered acquittals.
What happened in R v Zargar?
Facts:
In the early morning hours of December 30th, 2011, police were called to a condominium to investigate a noise complaint. Earlier that evening, building security had attended at one of the condo units in the building and had asked the male resident to turn down his loud music. Police were eventually called to speak with the resident when he refused to comply with security’s request.
One of the police officers responding to the call for assistance knocked on the door of the condo unit and stepped inside when the owner, Mr. Zargar, answered his door.
After a brief discussion, the officer was asked by Mr. Zargar to leave his home. When the officer refused to leave, Mr. Zargar attempted to push him out of the unit. Mr. Zargar was charged with assaulting the officer while the officer was in the lawful execution of his duties contrary to section 270(1)(a) of the Criminal Code of Canada.
The issue for the Court to decide was whether the officer was trespassing on private property when he entered the residence and refused to leave such that he could no longer claim he was in the lawful execution of his duties when he was assaulted by Mr. Zargar.
Why it mattered. Assaulting a peace officer under Criminal Code s. 270(1)(a) is punishable by up to five years’ imprisonment on indictment (s. 270(2)). The charge depends on the officer being engaged in the lawful execution of their duty. An officer who is trespassing is not.
What is the “sanctity of the home” doctrine?
To determine whether or not the officer was entitled to enter the residence, the Court examined the legal concept of sanctity of the home which states that there exists, “the longstanding right of a citizen of this country to the control and enjoyment of his own property, including the right to determine who shall and who shall not be permitted to invade it.” Those words come from the Supreme Court of Canada in Colet v The Queen, [1981] 1 SCR 2, which traced the principle to Semayne’s Case in 1604: a person’s house is “his castle and fortress.”
With respect to whether police can enter a private residence, it has long been held that, “The police must, therefore, rely entirely upon a valid and unrevoked invitation to enter and remain in the house. … Unless authorized by statute or the common law, a police officer may not enter the premises of another without that other’s permission and must leave if and when that permission is revoked.”
Since 1982 the Charter has added constitutional weight. Section 8 guarantees that “everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure.” In R v Feeney, [1997] 2 SCR 13, the Supreme Court held that the privacy interest in the home now generally outweighs the interest of the police, and that warrantless arrests in dwelling houses are, in general, prohibited.
When can police enter your home without permission?
The court identified some exceptions to the general rule that the police must not enter a person’s home uninvited. These exceptions include:
Hot pursuit
Source: common law
1) Where the police are in “hot pursuit” or “continuous pursuit” of an offender who has fled into a home, their own or someone else’s, to escape arrest. The pursuit must be continuous and conducted with reasonable diligence, so that the offence, the chase and the arrest form a single transaction (R v Macooh, [1993] 2 SCR 802). It applies to provincial offences as well as criminal ones. It does not cover the “hot pursuit” of an investigation: in Zargar, the resident was already at home.
To protect life or prevent serious harm
Source: common law duty to protect life
2) Where the police, on reasonable grounds, believe that it is necessary to enter the premises in order to prevent the commission of an offence that would cause immediate and serious injury, or to protect life and safety by assisting a resident who is in potential danger. In R v Godoy, [1999] 1 SCR 311, the Supreme Court upheld a forced entry after a 911 call was disconnected, but limited it: police may enter to find the caller and ascertain their health and safety, and have no further permission to search the home.
To arrest someone inside
Source: Criminal Code ss. 529–529.5
3) Where the police enter the premises in order to effect the arrest of a resident. An arrest warrant on its own is not enough: since R v Feeney, police generally need judicial authorization to enter the home itself, either added to the arrest warrant (s. 529) or as a separate warrant to enter a dwelling-house (s. 529.1), often called a Feeney warrant. Before entering they must normally announce themselves; skipping that step requires grounds, at the moment of entry, to fear imminent bodily harm or the imminent loss of evidence (s. 529.4).
Exigent circumstances
Source: Criminal Code ss. 529.3 and 487.11; CDSA s. 11(7)
4) There are also a few exceptions in the Criminal Code that permit entry to a home where “exigent circumstances” exist. Exigent circumstances are defined by statute to include “imminent bodily harm or death” and “imminent loss or imminent destruction of evidence”. To enter to make an arrest, police need reasonable grounds to suspect that entry is necessary to prevent imminent bodily harm or death, or reasonable grounds to believe that evidence of an indictable offence is inside and entry is necessary to prevent its imminent loss or destruction (s. 529.3(2)). In every case the conditions for a warrant must exist and the urgency must make getting one impracticable, not merely inconvenient (R v Paterson, 2017 SCC 15, on the drug-search power in CDSA s. 11(7)).
A search warrant
Source: Criminal Code s. 487
5) Police may also enter a residence where they have obtained prior judicial approval in the form of a search warrant. A justice issues it on sworn information showing reasonable grounds to believe that evidence of an offence is in the place to be searched. Drug searches use a similar warrant under s. 11 of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act.
Your permission
Source: consent
Police may always come in if you invite them. The invitation must be real, and it can be taken back: once you revoke it, officers who have no other legal authority must leave.
The legal powers at a glance
| Power | Where it comes from | What police need |
|---|---|---|
| Search warrant | Criminal Code s. 487 | Sworn reasonable grounds that evidence of an offence is inside |
| Warrant to enter to arrest | ss. 529, 529.1 | Reasonable grounds that the person is or will be inside, and grounds to arrest them |
| Entry to arrest without a warrant | s. 529.3 | Exigent circumstances make a warrant impracticable |
| Search without a warrant | s. 487.11; CDSA s. 11(7) | Grounds for a warrant exist, but urgency makes getting one impracticable |
| Hot pursuit | Common law (Macooh) | A continuous chase of someone fleeing arrest |
| Emergency or 911 call | Common law (Godoy) | A risk to life or safety; entry limited to protecting it |
If officers say they have a warrant, ask to see it: whoever executes a warrant must have it with them where feasible and produce it when asked (Criminal Code s. 29(1)). If they have one, or another of the powers above, refusing to open the door will not stop a lawful entry. Before forcing their way in to arrest someone, police should generally announce their presence and purpose and ask to be let in (Feeney). Arguing the point physically is dangerous; the place to challenge an unlawful entry is in court.
Can physical force be used to remove a police officer who trespasses on private property?
The Court concluded that the police officer became a trespasser when he entered Mr. Zargar’s home without his permission and without bringing himself within one of the recognized exceptions to the “sanctity of the home” principle.
Canada’s self-defence laws, rewritten by the Citizen’s Arrest and Self-defence Act (in force March 11, 2013), allow a person in peaceable possession of property to commit a reasonable act (including the use of force) for the purpose of protecting that property from being taken, damaged or trespassed upon (Criminal Code s. 35). It will be up to the Court to decide in all the circumstances whether the force used in ejecting a trespasser was reasonable. Any amount of force deemed to be unreasonable is not permitted under the laws of Canada.
In Mr. Zargar’s case, the Court concluded that the “minimal force” applied to the officer when Mr. Zargar attempted to push him out of the unit was reasonable in the circumstances. The force used was deemed to be justifiable on the basis that the officer was trespassing and refused to leave when asked. The amount of force deemed to be justifiable will be decided on a case by case basis after considering all of the facts and circumstances. The events in Zargar took place in December 2011, before the current s. 35 came into force; the same question is now decided under it.
A caution before you push. Section 35 does not protect force used against someone doing what the law requires or authorizes them to do in enforcing the law, unless you believe on reasonable grounds that they are acting unlawfully (s. 35(3)). Whether an officer’s entry was lawful is often decided months later, by a judge. Tell the officers clearly to leave, do not physically resist, and speak to a lawyer. See also our page on obstructing a police officer.
To learn more about the right to eject a trespasser or defend yourself and property from an intruder, read our article on Changes to the Citizen’s Power of Arrest, Self-Defence and Defence Of Property Laws in Canada, and our commentary on self-defence in the home.
What happens if police enter your home illegally?
Two things can follow. A charge that depends on the officer acting lawfully, such as assaulting or obstructing an officer, may fail, as it did for Mr. Zargar. And anything found as a result of the entry can be challenged under the Charter.
A Charter breach
An entry or search that no warrant, statute or common-law power authorizes is presumed unreasonable and infringes s. 8. Unlawful entry can also turn an encounter into an arbitrary detention under s. 9, as in R v Le.
Evidence may be excluded
Under s. 24(2) the court weighs the seriousness of the police conduct, its impact on the accused’s protected interests, and society’s interest in a trial on the merits (R v Grant, 2009 SCC 32). In Feeney the evidence was excluded and a new trial ordered; in Le and Paterson it was excluded and acquittals entered.
Not always
Exclusion is not automatic. In Singer (2026), the Supreme Court found that opening a truck door in a driveway was an unreasonable search, yet admitted the evidence given the seriousness of the impaired driving offence.
Why Choose Daniel Brown Law?
Daniel Brown Law is a leading Canadian criminal defence firm. Challenging how police entered a home and what they found there is a core part of our defence work.
A nationally recognized defence firm
An award-winning reputation in criminal defence and appellate advocacy: ranked among Canada’s top criminal law boutiques by Canadian Lawyer, listed for criminal defence by The Globe and Mail and Best Law Firms, and voted Best Law Firm and Best Legal Services by Toronto Star readers.
Charter challenges at trial
Warrants, exigent circumstances and implied licences are tested on the evidence. Our lawyers read the warrant, the sworn information behind it and the officers’ notes, and bring the Charter application when the entry does not stand up.
Advice while it matters
If police have come to your home, or you expect them to, our lawyers can advise you on your rights before you speak to them, and defend you if a charge follows.
Recognized by the profession and the public
Daniel Brown Law is ranked among Canada’s top criminal law boutiques by Canadian Lawyer, listed by The Globe and Mail and Best Law Firms for criminal defence, and voted Best Legal Services by Toronto Star readers. Five of its lawyers are recognized by Best Lawyers in Canada for criminal defence.
Best Law Firms: Criminal Law
The Globe and Mail, 2026
Top Criminal Law Boutique
Canadian Lawyer, 2026–27
Criminal Defence, Tier 1
Best Law Firms Canada, 2026
Best Lawyers in Canada
Criminal Defence, 2027
Toronto Star Readers’ Choice
Best Law Firm and Best Legal Services, repeat winner
Crime, Nationwide
Chambers Canada, 2027
The firm and its lawyers have been repeatedly recognized for excellence in criminal defence:
- Canada’s Best Law Firms 2026 — The Globe and Mail (Report on Business)
- Canada’s Top Criminal Law Boutiques 2026–27 — Canadian Lawyer Magazine
- Best Law Firms 2026 — Criminal Defence and Appellate Practice (Best Lawyers / Best Law Firms)
- Best Lawyers in Canada — Criminal Defence — Daniel Brown, Hilary Dudding, Mark Halfyard, Lindsay Board and Colleen McKeown
- Toronto Star Readers’ Choice Awards — Best Law Firm and Best Legal Services, repeat winner
- Chambers Canada 2027 — ranked for Crime, nationwide, by Chambers and Partners
- Certified Specialists in Criminal Law — Law Society of Ontario (Daniel Brown and Mark Halfyard — fewer than 2% of Ontario criminal lawyers hold this designation)
Police Entry into Your Home — Frequently Asked Questions
Short answers to the questions people ask about police at their door.
At your door
Can police enter your home without a warrant?
Only in limited cases: with your permission, in hot pursuit of someone fleeing arrest, to protect life or safety (for example after a disconnected 911 call), or where exigent circumstances make getting a warrant impracticable (Criminal Code ss. 529.3 and 487.11). Otherwise a warrant is required.
Do you have to open the door for police?
You do not have to invite officers in. Police may approach and knock under the implied licence that applies to everyone, but that licence ends at the door (R v Singer, 2026 SCC 8). If they have a warrant or another legal power to enter, refusing will not stop a lawful entry, and you should not physically resist.
Can police come onto your property without permission?
They may walk up to your front door to knock and speak with you, as any visitor may. Going beyond that, such as into a fenced backyard or searching around the house, needs legal authority. In R v Le, 2019 SCC 34, officers who entered a backyard without it were trespassers.
Can you tell police to leave your property?
Yes, if they are there only on the implied licence or your invitation. The licence can be revoked at any time by a clear expression of intent, and an officer with no other legal authority must then leave. It does not work against a warrant, hot pursuit or an emergency entry.
Warrants and emergencies
Can police enter your home to arrest someone?
Generally only with a warrant that authorizes entry to the home, not just an arrest warrant (R v Feeney, [1997] 2 SCR 13; Criminal Code ss. 529 and 529.1). The exceptions are hot pursuit and exigent circumstances under s. 529.3.
Can police enter your home for a 911 call or a wellness check?
After a 911 call, including one that is disconnected, police may enter to find the caller and make sure they are safe (R v Godoy, [1999] 1 SCR 311). That entry is limited to protecting life and safety; it does not permit a search of the home.
What are exigent circumstances?
Urgent situations that call for immediate action to protect life or safety or to prevent evidence from being lost or destroyed, where taking the time to get a warrant would be impracticable, not merely inconvenient (Criminal Code s. 529.3(2); R v Paterson, 2017 SCC 15).
Force and evidence
Can you push a police officer out of your home?
In R v Zargar, 2014 ONSC 1415, a push to remove an officer who was trespassing and refused to leave was found reasonable. But s. 35 of the Criminal Code does not protect force against someone lawfully enforcing the law unless you believe on reasonable grounds they are acting unlawfully, and a court decides that later. Assaulting a peace officer carries up to five years on indictment. Ask the officer to leave and do not physically resist.
What happens to evidence found after an illegal entry?
The entry may breach s. 8 of the Charter, and the court decides under s. 24(2) whether admitting the evidence would bring the administration of justice into disrepute, applying R v Grant, 2009 SCC 32. Evidence is often excluded after an unlawful entry into a home, but not always.
Charges we defend
Learn more about some of the charges we defend. We defend more than what we have written blog articles about.
- Assault
- Bail hearings
- Bail pending appeal
- Coercive control
- Criminal appeals
- Criminal harassment
- Dangerous driving
- Distributing an intimate image
- Domestic assault
- Drug possession
- Drug trafficking
- Extradition
- Fail to appear at court
- Fail to comply with bail
- Failing to remain at the scene
- Firearm and weapon possession
- Forcible confinement
- Fraud
- Impaired driving
- Importing drugs
- Mischief
- Murder and manslaughter
- Obstruct police
- Peace bonds
- Public mischief
- Refusing a breath sample
- Robbery
- Sexual assault
- Sexual exploitation
- Theft and shoplifting
- Uttering threats
- Voyeurism
- Young offenders
Police entered your home? Talk to Daniel Brown Law
Whether an entry was lawful can decide what evidence the Crown can use. To arrange a confidential consultation with Daniel Brown Law, contact our team or call our office at (416) 297-7200.
Phone: (416) 297-7200
Office: Daniel Brown Law, 400–103 Church St., Toronto, ON M5C 2G3