New tort of intimate partner violence: Supreme Court hears NAWL’s warnings 

Anishinaabe Territory / Ottawa, May 19, 2026 – The National Association of Women and the Law (NAWL) welcomes the landmark decision by the Supreme Court of Canada in Ahluwalia v. Ahluwalia, recognizing a new tort of intimate partner violence, a legal tool that will help survivors seek financial compensation and hold abusers accountable. 

In a significant victory for survivors, the Court recognized that existing torts such as assault and intentional infliction of emotional distress do not fully capture the profound harms caused by coercive and controlling abuse in intimate relationships. The Court confirmed that intimate partner violence includes patterns of domination and liberty deprivation that undermine a survivor’s dignity, autonomy, and equality. 

Importantly, the Supreme Court explicitly engaged with and cited NAWL’s intervention throughout the decision, acknowledging the serious risk that, if improperly defined, a new tort could be “weaponized” against the very survivors of intimate partner violence it seeks to protect. 

NAWL intervened before the country’s highest court to ensure the new tort would not be used against victims who take steps to protect themselves and their children from abuse. Survivors are frequently accused of being “controlling”, “alienating”, or abusive when they resist violence, relocate for safety, disclose abuse, or refuse additional parenting time with an abusive parent. NAWL successfully called on the Court to discuss and prevent these risks. 

Writing for the majority, Justice Kasirer warned that an “overinclusive tort not centered on coercive control could capture acts of resistance” and “inappropriately enable abusers to bring a claim against survivors of intimate partner violence under the new tort”. 

The Court also explicitly recognized litigation abuse as a tactic used by abusers to maintain control after separation, citing NAWL’s submissions that courts must “minimize the risk that [the new tort] will be weaponized against victims of family violence”. 

In her concurring opinion, Justice Karakatsanis also wrote that “the tort of intimate partner violence excludes actions taken by an individual to protect themselves or their children from violence”, including the protective behaviours named by NAWL such as “a partner’s decision to relocate to put distance between their child and their abuser, a decision to refuse the abusive parent additional parenting time, and disclosing instances of intimate partner violence”. She emphasized that “Trial judges must properly identify these dynamics and ensure protective behaviours are not inappropriately captured under this broader tort.” 

This decision is groundbreaking not only because it recognizes intimate partner violence as a distinct legal harm, but because the Court directly confronted the reality that legal remedies can themselves be weaponized against survivors.  

NAWL thanks its legal team – Suzanne Zaccour (NAWL), Amanda Therrien (NAWL), Helen Richards (Ross Nasseri LLP), and Lauren Grammer (Ross Nasseri LLP) – and our National Steering Committee members and the Violence Against Women Working Group, in particular Lise Gotell and Jennifer Koshan, as well as Deanne Sowter, for their invaluable expertise and contributions.