Ahluwalia v. Ahluwalia is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of Canada which established a common law tort of intimate partner violence.
Facts Kuldeep Ahluwalia and Amrit Ahluwalia were married in India in 1999 and immigrated to Canada in 2001. They had two children. The couple separated in 2016. In court proceedings in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Ms Ahluwalia requested extensive damages for physical, mental and emotional abuse from Mr Ahluwalia over the course of the marriage.Jessica Mach, "Landmark Supreme Court of Canada decision creates new tort of intimate partner violence", Canadian Lawyer, May 15, 2026.
Decisions of the Ontario courts In 2022, after an eleven day trial, the Superior Court ruled in favour of Ms Ahluwalia. The trial judge found that Mr Ahluwalia had engaged in serious physical assaults on Ms Ahluwalia during the course of the marriage, and that there was an overall pattern of coercive and controlling behaviour on his part. The trial judge also concluded that existing torts, such as assault, battery, or intentional infliction of emotional distress did not adequately cover the overall pattern of behaviour and the cumulative harm. The trial judge found that there was a tort of intimate family violence, that Mr Ahluwalia was liable, and assessed damages of $150,000.
On appeal, the Ontario Court of Appeal disagreed with the creation of the new tort of intimate family violence, ruling that existing torts were adequate to cover the harms suffered by Ms Ahluwalia. The Court of Appeal reduced the damages award to $100,000.
Supreme Court of Canada Ms Ahluwalia appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada, which heard the appeal over two days, February 11 and 12, 2025. In addition to the two parties, there were seventeen interveners, including the Attorney General of Canada, the Attorney General of British Columbia and numerous family violence support agencies. The Court reserved judgment.Daniel Kim, Tyler Li, Drew Meetze and Christine Yang, "SCC dispatch: Canada’s top court questions the future of legal remedies for intimate partner violence", JuristNews, February 17, 2025.
The Supreme Court gave its decision on May 15, 2026. By a 6-3 decision, the Court allowed the appeal and held that there was a tort of intimate partner violence.
Justice Kasirer wrote the majority decision for himself and four other judges, recognising the tort of intimate partner violence. He disagreed with the trial judge's framing of the new tort as intimate family violence, as it was not supported by the facts and in his view was too broad. He restricted the tort to the relationship between the intimate partners, not the family as a whole.Ahluwalia v. Ahluwalia, 2026 SCC 16.
Justice Karakatsanis concurred in the decision, and agreed with the new tort of intimate partner violence, but would have expanded one of the elements of the tort beyond that set by the majority.
Justice Jamal dissented, with two other judges concurring. He would have held that the existing common law torts were sufficient to deal with the issue of intimate partner violence and there was no need for the court to create a new tort.
References