The criminal justice system can be daunting, but you don’t need to go through it alone. Our Criminal lawyers are here to guide you every step of the way.
Contact Our Firm
When you or someone you love is threatened, instinct takes over. But even in high-stress moments, Canadian law requires that your response be justified, reasonable, and defensible in court. Our team at Neuberger & Partners LLP has decades of experience helping clients navigate the legal complexities of self-defence.
Self-defence in Canada is a legal justification, not an excuse. That means when it applies, it makes your actions lawful. The law recognizes that people have a right to respond to force or threats of force. There is no duty to retreat. However, the response must be reasonable in the circumstances.
Section 34 of the Criminal Code of Canada sets out three requirements that must all be met for self-defence or defence of another to apply:
You must believe, on reasonable grounds, that you or someone else was being threatened with force or was under attack
Your actions must have been taken to protect, not to punish or retaliate.
The force used must be proportionate to the threat. Courts recognize that decisions in high-stress situations aren’t always perfect. The measure of force used does not have to have to measured to a nicety. This means that in the heat of the moment, a person is not expected to precisely calculate the exact amount of force needed, but excessive or vengeful force will not be protected under law. The law recognizes that people in dangerous situations cannot be expected to weigh every detail and act with perfect precision, focusing instead on the overall reasonableness of their actions.
Courts look at many elements, including:
Importantly, you are not required to flee your own home. Canadian law does not demand retreat when defending yourself or others in your residence.
Even if you were mistaken, such as believing someone was armed when they weren’t, you may still be protected under self-defence laws, provided your belief was reasonable given the circumstances.
This principle has been recognized in cases such as R. v. Cinous, 2002 SCC 29, where the Supreme Court confirmed that an accused may rely on self-defence even if mistaken, so long as the belief in danger was reasonable.
Section 34 applies equally when defending someone else. Whether you stepped in to protect a loved one, a bystander, or even a stranger, the same three-part test applies: reasonable belief, defensive purpose, and reasonable response.
Founded in 1993, Neuberger & Partners LLP is a high profile Toronto law firm with exclusive focus on criminal law. Our lawyers have represented clients in simple, complex and high-profile cases throughout the Greater Toronto Area and across Ontario.
About Us
August 28th, 2026
When Does Reasonable Doubt Require an Acquittal in a Child Sexual Assault Case? Joseph A. Neuberger, Michael P. Bury, and...
Read MoreAugust 27th, 2026
When May a Court Properly Consider Whether a Complainant Has a Motive to Fabricate? Joseph A. Neuberger, Michael P. Bury,...
Read MoreAugust 24th, 2026
Can Cannabis-Induced Psychosis Support a Full Acquittal? Joseph A. Neuberger, Michael P. Bury, and Diana Davison,...
Read MoreAugust 19th, 2026
What Happens When a Witness FaceTimes Her Boyfriend from the Witness Stand? Joseph A. Neuberger, Michael P. Bury, and...
Read More