Overview
On May 15, 2026, the Supreme Court of Canada decision of Ahluwalia v. Ahluwalia (2026 SCC 16) was released. It recognized Intimate Partner Violence (“IPV”) as a new tort which addressed patterns of abuse within intimate partnerships.
This unprecedented change in case law opened up the possibility for parties of family law court proceedings to make claims of IPV.
New family law litigants that are victims of IPV will now have the option to include the claim in their pleadings and those that have previously filed their pleadings may amend them.
As in Ahluwalia v. Ahluwalia, victims of IPV may now be entitled to significant damage awards valued at tens of thousands or even more than one hundred thousand dollars.
What is Intimate Partner Violence (IPV)?
IPV is coercive or controlling conduct that deprives a person of their autonomy, dignity or equality. It may include physical, sexual, emotional, and/or financial abuse.
IPV is characterized by a violation of the victim’s personhood, extending beyond physical or psychological violence. It entails a pattern of coercion that can slowly unfold over time and may or may not be punctuated by incidents of physical or emotional distress.
A single act of violence may constitute IPV where it forms part of a pattern of coercive or controlling conduct. This tort covers conduct that occurs during an intimate partnership or after separation.
What is a Tort?
A tort is a civil wrong, outside of a breach of contract, that causes someone harm. The party causing the harm may face legal liability for the act.
Tort law seeks not to punish the offender criminally but to provide remedies for victims such as compensation and restoring matters to the state of being before the tort was committed.
Why Did the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) Create this New Tort?
In Ahluwalia v. Ahluwalia, existing torts such as assault, battery, or intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED) did not capture the depth and uniqueness of IPV that was experienced by the Applicant.
IPV relates to unique harms as victims experience coercive control in their intimate partnerships, which is often a pattern of subtle behaviours rather than one event. Previously established torts do not address the loss of autonomy, dignity, and/or equality caused by IPV. The existing remedies fail to account for the intimate partner context and breach of trust within intimate relationships.
By recognizing the tort of IPV, the Supreme Court addressed the previously existing gap and captured the broader harm caused by coercive control in intimate partnerships. The new tort will hopefully encourage IPV victims to take legal action and seek remedies for loss of dignity and autonomy, which were not previously recognized in existing torts.
This tort or wrong is not only a breach of autonomy and/or dignity in isolation, but a collapse of the shared normative foundation that intimate partnerships are meant to be based on.
What is ‘Coercive Control’?
Coercive control is conduct or behaviours that strip a victim of their autonomy and/or free will.
Coercion can be subtle, indirect, invisible, and cumulative over time. This conduct creates fear, helplessness and dependency. IPV is not limited to physical violence, although physical abuse may be part of a wider pattern of coercive control.
Examples of coercive control may include isolating a partner from friends or family, controlling finances, intimidation, litigation abuse, threats, sexual or emotional violence, or repeated conduct intended to create fear or dependency. Threats may not be isolated or of imminent harm. Over time, victims of Intimate Partner Violence experiencing repeated threats are impacted continually by the effects of control and subordination.
Coercive control creates disparity in relationships with victims becoming vulnerable and subordinate to their partners. Mutuality in the relationship is replaced with a forced hierarchy which deprives one partner of equal standing, which is the foundation of any intimate partnership.
What Counts as an ‘Intimate Partnership?
Intimate partnerships are distinguished from other types of relationships with friends, family, strangers, or parent-child relationships.
Intimate partnerships can be categorized as close personal connections that are sustained over time with a mutual interdependence, care, and commitment, and/or emotional, financial, domestic and physical intimacy. These relationships are not solely defined by marriage, cohabitation, or sexual relations, but rather rooted in the close, vulnerable nature of these relationships.
It is the nature of intimate partnerships that allow abusers to exert control over victims.
Intimate relationships are unions between equal partners creating mutual obligations to share a common life together marked by intimacy, interdependence, and respect. Intimate partnerships can leave vulnerable people open to experiencing harm at the hands of the individual in which they have placed their trust.
IPV is more than underlying events, it is ultimately centered around conduct that is intended to dominate the relationship through coercion and control of the other.
Should I Make an IPV Tort Claim?
Before making an IPV Tort claim, it is best to obtain legal advice first as there are many factors a lawyer assesses before advising a client to make or not to make such a claim.
First, a lawyer would determine if your situation falls within the scope of the three elements required of the IPV tort:
- The abusive conduct must have arisen within an intimate partnership or in its aftermath. In addition, the abusive conduct may start or continue after the intimate partnership has ended through co-parenting or litigation abuse.
- The inflictor of IPV must have intentionally engaged in this conduct. Specific evidence of this claim must be provided, however, even if it appears less harmful in isolation, it will be assessed holistically to assess a potential pattern of coercive control. Types of conduct that are capable of constituting coercive control include the following:
- Physical and/or sexual violence;
- Emotional and/or psychological abuse including verbal abuse, harassment, humiliation, or denigration,
- Financial control;
- Stalking and surveillance;
- Isolating a partner from others or opportunities;
- Litigation abuse;
- Threating harm to themselves or others, and/or taking children.
- A reasonable person, knowing the facts and context, would perceive this conduct to be considered coercive control. The key feature of coercive control in the context of IPV claims is the diminished power for the victim regarding decisions for their own life or decisions that affect the intimate partnership. There must be a violation to one’s autonomy, dignity, and equality.
The courts require all three elements be fulfilled for victims to seek remedies for IPV.
The following claims may unlikely be covered by the IPV Tort:
- Grievances;
- Emotional conflict;
- Vengeful behaviours; and/or
- High-conflict separations that occur within or after a relationship.
Issues in intimate partner relationships such as dishonesty, infidelity, or disagreements also do not necessarily constitute coercive control.
How a family lawyer can help
A family lawyer can help you assess the strength of your claim.
To do so, they would first review your relationship history to get a sense of the extent of the family violence and level of coercive control that you have experienced.
Then, the lawyer would review the potential evidence that you may have to support your claims and evidence that your spouse may present to counter your claims.
After this review, the lawyer would provide you with a summary of how your case fits into comparable case law that could be used to estimate the level of damages that you may be entitled to.
For an example of a recent decision where a party received damages of $175,000 in tort for family violence, please see David Tobin’s case Zunnurain v. Chowdhury, 2024 ONSC 552 (CanLII). Please also note that David’s case was referred to by the Supreme Court of Canada in Ahluwalia v. Ahluwalia at paragraph 356.
If you are interested to learn more about the Tort of Intimate Partner Violence, please schedule a consultation meeting with one of our lawyers at Frenkel Tobin by way of email or phone call.