Call Us 24/7 AT (416) 658-1818
Criminal negligence is a serious offence under Canadian law, encompassing actions or omissions that show reckless disregard for the safety of others. From causing bodily harm to fatal outcomes, such cases often involve complex legal issues, significant penalties, and the need for robust defence strategies.
This article provides a comprehensive guide to criminal negligence in Canada, including key distinctions from civil negligence, the elements the Crown must prove for a conviction, potential penalties, and common defences.
If you’re navigating such charges, understanding these aspects is critical—and so is securing experienced legal representation.
Criminal negligence is outlined in Section 219 of the Criminal Code. It refers to actions—or omissions—that show a wanton or reckless disregard for the safety of others. This offence arises when an individual, bound by a legal duty, fails to meet that obligation in a way that endangers lives. Section 219(2) of the Criminal Code defines duty as any legal obligation imposed by law, such as ensuring the safety of others when engaging in activities like driving or operating machinery.
Criminal negligence causing bodily harm occurs when the accused’s conduct results in injury to another person. Section 221 of the Criminal Code defines criminal negligence as a marked and substantial departure from the standard of care expected of a reasonable person in the same circumstances. A failure to fulfil this duty in a manner that demonstrates a reckless disregard for human safety can lead to charges of criminal negligence causing bodily harm.
Criminal negligence causing death is a grave offence described in Section 220 of the Criminal Code. If an individual’s criminally negligent actions result in the death of another person, they may face an indictable offence charge. Under Section 222(5) of the Criminal Code, causing the death of another human being is classified as a homicide, which is further divided into:
To secure a conviction for culpable homicide caused by criminal negligence, the Crown must establish that the accused’s conduct was a significant contributing cause of the death.
Driving offences are a common context for criminal negligence charges. However, it's important to distinguish between distinct offences. Section 320.13 of the Criminal Code defines dangerous driving as operating a vehicle in a manner that is dangerous to the public, considering all the circumstances. This can include acts like excessive speeding, impaired driving, or other reckless behaviors.
However, criminal negligence in driving, covered under Sections 220 and 221, goes beyond simply driving dangerously. It requires proof that the driver's conduct represented a marked departure from the standard of care expected of a reasonable person and showed wanton or reckless disregard for the lives and safety of others. This means they were aware of the risks but persisted in their actions anyway.
Driving offences resulting in serious injury or death due to negligence carry severe penalties.
The severity of these charges makes it crucial for accused individuals to seek experienced legal guidance to navigate the complexities of such cases effectively.
Criminal negligence and civil negligence both involve a failure to meet a standard of care, but under Canadian law, they differ significantly in purpose, proof, and consequences.
Civil Negligence
Civil negligence occurs when an individual fails to exercise reasonable care, leading to harm or loss to another person. This can arise in various situations, such as car accidents, medical malpractice, or slip-and-fall incidents. It is primarily used to determine liability in civil lawsuits, such as personal injury claims arising from motor vehicle accidents. The standard of proof in civil negligence cases is the balance of probabilities, meaning it must be more likely than not that the negligence caused the harm.
Criminal Negligence
Criminal negligence, as defined in Section 219 of the Criminal Code, involves a wanton or reckless disregard for the safety of others. It has a higher blameworthiness threshold than civil negligence and is treated as a criminal offence. To convict someone of criminal negligence, the Crown must prove the offence beyond a reasonable doubt, which is the highest standard of proof in law.
Key Differences
To secure a conviction for criminal negligence causing death, the Crown must establish all essential elements of the offence beyond a reasonable doubt. These elements include the actus reus (guilty act) and mens rea (guilty mind), both of which must be proven to demonstrate culpability.
The actus reus refers to the physical act or omission that caused the victim’s death. The Crown must demonstrate three critical components:
Both factual causation (but for the accused’s actions, the death would not have occurred) and legal causation (the actions significantly contributed to the death) must be proven.
The mens rea involves the mental element of the offence, requiring a marked and substantial departure from the behaviour of a reasonable person under similar circumstances. The Crown must establish:
For criminal negligence causing death, the Crown must show that the accused’s conduct created an unacceptable level of risk, leading directly to the victim’s death.
The penalties for criminal negligence vary depending on the harm caused and the circumstances of the offence. Convictions for criminal negligence can result in significant imprisonment, reflecting the seriousness of these charges.
Criminal negligence causing bodily harm is a straight indictable offence, meaning the Crown cannot proceed summarily. The maximum sentence for this offence is 10 years of imprisonment in a penitentiary.
Criminal negligence causing death is among the most serious offences under the Criminal Code. It is punishable by a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. Unlike some other offences, individuals convicted of criminal negligence causing death are not eligible for conditional sentence orders, which allow a sentence to be served in the community nor discharges, which prevent a criminal record post-conviction.
Criminal negligence caused by dangerous driving carries specific penalties based on the harm caused and whether the Crown proceeds with the charge as a summary or indictable offence:
Causing Bodily Harm:
Causing Death:
Dangerous driving causing death is always treated as an indictable offence, carrying a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.
Defending against a charge of criminal negligence causing death requires a thorough legal strategy tailored to the specific circumstances of the case.
A defence based on factual innocence argues that the accused did not commit the alleged offence. This can include demonstrating that the accused was not present at the scene, that their actions or omissions did not amount to criminal negligence, or that the Crown has not proven the basic elements of the offence beyond a reasonable doubt. For example, the accused may present evidence such as alibi witnesses, surveillance footage, or expert testimony to support their claim of innocence. If the Crown cannot establish these elements, a conviction cannot be secured.
A core component of criminal negligence is the foreseeability of risk. The defence may argue that a reasonable person in the accused’s position could not have foreseen their actions leading to death. If the risk was unforeseeable, the mens rea (guilty mind) cannot be established.
The Crown must show that the accused’s actions represented a marked and substantial departure from what a reasonable person would have done. The defence can challenge this by demonstrating that the accused’s conduct was consistent with reasonable behaviour under the circumstances and that the alleged actions do not meet the elevated threshold required to establish criminal negligence.
The defence may contest causation by arguing that the victim’s death would have occurred regardless of the accused’s actions (factual causation) or that the accused’s actions were not a significant contributing factor to the death (legal causation). For instance, the defence may argue that a pre-existing medical condition caused the victim's death, or that intervening events, such as the actions of another person, were the primary cause of death. If either form of causation cannot be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, the actus reus (guilty act) is not satisfied.
If the accused’s Charter rights were violated during the investigation or prosecution, the defence can seek to exclude evidence under Section 24(2) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Common violations include unlawful searches or seizures and failures to inform the accused of their right to legal counsel. By excluding evidence obtained in breach of Charter rights, the defence can weaken the Crown’s case and potentially secure an acquittal.
Successfully defending against criminal negligence causing death charges requires experienced legal representation to assess the evidence, identify weaknesses in the Crown’s case, and advocate for a favourable outcome.
If you are facing charges of criminal negligence causing bodily harm or death, it is essential to seek the assistance of an experienced criminal defence lawyer. Navigating the complexities of such cases requires a thorough understanding of the law, meticulous examination of the evidence, and a strong defence strategy tailored to your unique circumstances.
Pyzer Criminal Lawyers, with decades of experience in criminal defence, provides comprehensive legal support for individuals charged with criminal negligence in Ontario. Contacting a defence lawyer promptly can help you understand your rights, protect your interests, and work towards the best possible outcome in your case..
