Ahluwalia v Ahluwalia: Coercive Control is Actionable – Changing the Law Around Intimate Partner Violence
In the landmark decision from the Supreme Court of Canada in Ahluwalia v Ahluwalia, Canada’s top court has recognized the harm and actionable tort that exists in intimate partner violence, and coercive control in particular, in intimate partner relationships.
What is intimate partner violence and coercive control? The Supreme Court of Canada defined it as:
(a) abusive conduct where one intimate partner coerces and controls the other, thus depriving them of their autonomy, which renders them unequal in the partnership;
(b) egregious acts of physical and psychological violence, including tactics of isolation, manipulation, humiliation, surveillance, economic abuse, sexual coercion, and intimidation that can control and entrap intimate partners.
The Supreme Court of Canada stated that coercive control is not defined as a single abusive action, but rather recognized that coercive control operates over time, through patterns of conduct that deprives the victim of dignity, autonomy, and equality. Justice Kasirer explained that coercive intimate partner violence “should be understood as a continuing injury”.
The Supreme Court of Canada recognized the insidiousness of this particular form of domestic violence and has chosen to allow victims the ability to sue their intimate partner for damages in a separate action from their family law/divorce action.
In order to succeed in suing an intimate partner for coercive control, an intimate partner will need to prove that their partner’s actions deprived them of dignity, autonomy, and equality.
This new cause of action must meet 3 criteria:
1. The alleged conduct must arise within an intimate partnership or its aftermath;
2. The defendant must have intentionally engaged in the coercive control; and
3. Viewed objectively in the context of the relationship, the conduct amounted to coercive control.
Point number three is important to recognize as the test is not whether the complainant believes he or she was subject to coercive control, but whether the reasonable person viewing the relationship from an independent perspective would deem the defendant’s actions as coercive control resulting in the complainant’s loss of dignity, autonomy, and equality.
In Ahluwalia, the parties were married and in an intimate partner relationship for 16 years. Through the divorce proceedings, it was determined Ms. Ahluwalia was the victim of her husband’s abuse, which included physical assault, humiliation, intimidation, isolation, mistreatment, financial control, conduct intending to inflict emotional distress, and pressure for sex. The trial judge awarded Ms. Ahluwalia $150,000 in damages. The Ontario Court of Appeal overturned the trial judge’s decision. By the time the case reached the Supreme Court of Canada, Mr. and Ms. Ahluwalia had settled on an amount of $100,000 in damages, and Mr. Ahluwalia had admitted to his abusive conduct.
The importance of the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in this case is the Court’s recognition of a new area of law that says a person can be held civilly responsible for coercive control within an intimate partner relationship. This is often a subtle form of violence.
This new area of law will see an overlap between civil tort law and family/divorce law. It will be crucial for family law/divorce clients to be aware of this new tort and to address it with their family law lawyers.
Victims of intimate partner violence have new legal remedies available to them as the law recognizes the violence of coercive control. Victims should seek the advice of their family law/divorce lawyer immediately.
Danusia Bourdon, Family Lawyer
The content provided in the blog posts of Jones Divorce & Family Law is general information and should not be considered legal advice. Please contact a lawyer for legal advice tailored to your specific situation. All articles are current as of their original publication date.
