Sexual Offences

SOIRA registration is mandatory on conviction for most sexual offences, for periods ranging from ten years to life. The Supreme Court's R. v. Ndhlovu decision created limited judicial discretion in some cases. We assess SOIRA exposure as part of the resolution analysis.

Consent is the central issue in adult sexual-assault prosecutions. The Crown must prove its absence beyond a reasonable doubt — and what consent means under Canadian law (R. v. Ewanchuk, R. v. J.A., R. v. Barton) is highly technical. We map that analysis to your facts at the first meeting.

We treat every sexual-offence engagement with the discretion the matter requires. Many engagements remain confidential indefinitely. Where publication-ban applications are available, we pursue them at the appropriate stage.

Registration under SOIRA (the Sex Offender Information Registration Act) generally follows a conviction for a designated offence, not a charge. Avoiding a conviction — through an acquittal, withdrawal, or a resolution to a non-registerable offence — is often a central defence objective.

No. Every accused is presumed innocent, and the Crown must prove the charge beyond a reasonable doubt. Complainant accounts are tested for consistency and reliability, and the defence may lead evidence and cross-examine within the rules of evidence.

Not always. Where the evidence is weak or Charter issues arise, some matters resolve by withdrawal or to a lesser charge before trial. Where trial is the right answer, thorough preparation is essential given what is at stake.

Sexual assault under section 271 of the Criminal Code is a hybrid offence: up to 10 years’ imprisonment if prosecuted by indictment, or up to two years less a day summarily. If the complainant was under 16, the indictable maximum rises to 14 years, with a mandatory minimum of one year on indictment or six months summarily. Actual sentences vary widely with the facts, and a conviction can also bring sex offender registration and other ancillary orders.

No. When the Crown proceeds by indictment there is no limitation period, so sexual assault charges can be laid decades after the alleged events. Only summary proceedings must begin within 12 months under section 786(2) of the Criminal Code, unless both sides agree otherwise. Historical allegations raise their own defence issues — faded memories, lost records, shifting accounts and difficulty fixing dates and places — all of which must be explored carefully at trial.

Only in limited circumstances. Section 276 of the Criminal Code bars using the complainant’s other sexual activity — including with the accused — to suggest they were more likely to consent or are less worthy of belief. The defence can bring a pre-trial application to admit specific evidence for another relevant purpose, and the judge decides. Separate rules govern the complainant’s private records, including messages in the accused’s possession, so these applications must be planned early.

Under section 273.2 of the Criminal Code, an accused cannot rely on a mistaken belief in consent unless they took reasonable steps, in the circumstances known to them at the time, to ascertain that the complainant was consenting. The belief also cannot arise from self-induced intoxication, recklessness or wilful blindness. Consent must exist at the time of the activity and can be withdrawn. Aaron M. Spektor assesses whether this defence is genuinely available at the outset.