In Canada, “other assaults”common assault under section 266. These are assaults that do not involve a weapon, do not cause bodily harm, and are not aggravated, but still involve the intentional application of force—or threats of force—without consent. As a hybrid offence, other assaults in Canada can be prosecuted either summarily (for less serious cases) or by indictment (for more serious cases), with a maximum penalty of up to five years in prison.
The Legal Definition
Section 266 – Assault
Every one who commits an assault is guilty of
(a) an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years; or
(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.
The underlying definition of assault comes from section 265(1):
A person commits an assault when
(a) without the consent of another person, he applies force intentionally to that other person, directly or indirectly;
(b) he attempts or threatens, by an act or a gesture, to apply force to another person, if he has, or causes that other person to believe on reasonable grounds that he has, present ability to effect his purpose; or
(c) while openly wearing or carrying a weapon or an imitation thereof, he accosts or impedes another person or begs.
In plain English, the law says a common assault occurs when someone intentionally uses force against another person without their consent, or threatens to do so in a way that would make a reasonable person believe the threat could be carried out right away. “Force” is interpreted broadly—it can be a shove, a slap, grabbing someone’s arm, or even spitting on them. It does not have to cause injury for it to be a crime.
Subsection 265(1)(c) also captures situations where someone openly wearing or carrying a weapon accosts or impedes another person or begs. However, when that involves a weapon, police and Crown often charge under the more specific assault with a weapon provisions in section 267. For UCR Code 1480, other assaults Canada generally refers to those common assaults where no weapon is used and no bodily harm occurs—distinguishing them from assault causing bodily harm, assault with a weapon, and aggravated assault. The full statutory wording is set out on the federal Department of Justice site at the official section 266 page.
Penalties & Sentencing Framework
- Type of offence: Hybrid (can proceed by indictment or summary conviction).
- Mandatory minimum penalty: None.
- Maximum penalty (indictable): Up to 5 years’ imprisonment.
- Maximum penalty (summary conviction): Up to 2 years less a day in jail and/or a fine of up to $5,000.
Because section 266 is a hybrid offence, the Crown prosecutor chooses whether to proceed by indictment or by summary conviction. This choice is usually based on how serious the specific incident is: factors may include the level of force, any injuries (even if minor), the presence of children or vulnerable persons, prior criminal record, domestic context, and the impact on the victim. Indictable proceedings are reserved for more serious examples of common assault, while less serious, first-offence cases are often prosecuted summarily.
There is no mandatory minimum sentence for other assaults Canada under section 266. This gives judges a wide range of options, from absolute or conditional discharges, to fines, probation, conditional sentences (where legally available), or jail terms. On summary conviction, the maximum custodial sentence is two years less a day, often combined with probation and conditions such as no-contact orders, counselling (e.g., anger management, domestic violence programs), or community service. On indictment, the maximum penalty goes up to five years’ imprisonment, reflecting the law’s ability to respond more harshly to serious or repeated common assaults.
Sentencing is governed by the general principles in the Criminal Code: denunciation, deterrence, protection of the public, rehabilitation, reparation for harm to victims, and promoting a sense of responsibility in offenders. In practice, first-time offenders for minor shoves, pushes, or threats—especially where there is remorse and no prior history—may receive discharges or non-custodial sentences, while repeat or context-driven assaults (such as in domestic or power-imbalance relationships) are treated much more seriously. Even when the physical conduct is at the low end of the spectrum, courts emphasize that any non-consensual application of force is a significant invasion of personal security and dignity.
Common Defenses
-
Self-defence (reasonable force)
Self-defence is a central protection in Canadian criminal law, now set out in section 34 of the Criminal Code. For other assaults Canada under section 266, an accused may argue that they used force to defend themselves or another person from an actual or threatened assault, that they acted for a defensive purpose, and that the force used was reasonable in the circumstances. Courts examine all the surrounding facts: what the accused believed was happening, who initiated the confrontation, whether the threat was ongoing, the relative size and strength of the parties, whether weapons were involved, and whether there were options to retreat or de-escalate. If the Crown cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the force used was excessive or not truly defensive, a self-defence claim will lead to an acquittal.
-
Consent
The definition of assault in section 265(1) requires that the force be applied “without the consent of another person.” That means consent is a full defence to a charge of other assaults, provided it is legally valid. Consent can be express (spoken or written) or implied from conduct and the surrounding circumstances. Everyday social contact—like jostling in a busy subway, tapping someone on the shoulder to get their attention, or consensual sports—typically involves implied consent to a certain level of physical contact. However, consent has limits. Case law and section 265(3) set out that consent obtained by force, threats, fraud, or abuse of authority is not valid. In addition, courts have restricted consent in situations where the level of intentional bodily harm is serious; in those cases, even if someone “agrees” to be hurt, the law may not recognize consent as a defence. For simple, low-level common assaults falling under UCR 1480, though, a genuine, voluntary agreement to the touching or physical interaction can defeat the charge.
-
De minimis non curat lex (trivial or insignificant contact)
Another recognized defence for common assault is the principle of de minimis non curat lex, which means “the law does not concern itself with trifles.” In the context of other assaults Canada, this doctrine may apply where the non‑consensual contact is so minor and insignificant that it would be disproportionate to use the criminal law. Examples sometimes discussed in case law include a very light, momentary contact that barely exceeds normal social interaction and causes no distress or consequence. The threshold is high: not every minor or brief touching qualifies. Courts are cautious, because they must balance the need to protect bodily integrity with the need to avoid criminalizing every tiny social misstep. If a judge finds that the contact is effectively trivial and that using criminal sanctions would bring the justice system into disrepute, a de minimis defence can lead to an acquittal even where there was technically an intentional, non-consensual touching.
Real-World Example
Imagine two people engaged in a heated verbal argument in a public place. Tempers rise, and one person, in frustration, lightly shoves the other in the chest to push them away. There is no injury, no weapon, and the shove is momentary. The person who was shoved did not consent to being touched and feels intimidated and upset. Under Canadian law, this scenario is a textbook example of common assault or “other assaults” under UCR Code 1480. The force used—even though minor—was intentional and without consent, satisfying section 265(1)(a).
If police arrive and obtain statements, they may arrest and charge the person who shoved the other with assault under section 266. The Crown will then assess whether to proceed summarily or by indictment, usually choosing summary conviction for an isolated, low-level incident like this. In court, the defence might argue self-defence (if, for example, there was a genuine fear of being struck first), consent (if the interaction arose in a context where some pushing was mutually engaged in), or de minimis (if the contact was very slight and had no real impact). The judge would weigh all the evidence, including credibility of each party, any video footage, and prior history, to determine whether the legal elements of assault are proved beyond a reasonable doubt and whether any defence reasonably applies.
Record Suspensions (Pardons)
A conviction for other assaults Canada (common assault under section 266) will appear on an individual’s criminal record and can affect employment, volunteering, immigration status, travel, and family law proceedings. However, many people convicted of this offence are eventually eligible for a record suspension (formerly known as a pardon) through the Parole Board of Canada, provided they meet all statutory criteria and have completed their sentence.
The general waiting periods depend on how the offence was prosecuted and the sentence imposed. For common assault prosecuted by summary conviction, eligibility for a record suspension typically arises 5 years after the completion of the entire sentence, including any probation, fines, or restitution. For the same offence prosecuted by indictment, the waiting period is typically 10 years after full completion of the sentence. During this waiting period, the person must remain crime-free and demonstrate law-abiding behaviour. A record suspension, if granted, does not erase the history of the offence, but it separates the record from active criminal databases, significantly reducing its impact in most background checks conducted in Canada.
Related Violations
- Assault with a Weapon
- Assault Causing Bodily Harm
- Aggravated Assault