Domestic Violence in Criminal vs Family Court

Many people assume that a not-guilty verdict in a criminal court for domestic violence automatically clears a person of any wrongdoing in family court as well. However, this isn’t the case. Family and criminal courts operate under different standards, and a finding of not guilty in a criminal trial does not necessarily influence the outcome in family law proceedings. 

In this article, we’ll explore why criminal court decisions don’t always dictate family court outcomes in cases of domestic violence, and what that means for families navigating these complex situations. 

Criminal Court and Civil Court vs. Family Court

In a criminal court, the bar for proving guilt is very high. To convict someone of domestic violence, the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the person committed the crime. This means the evidence must leave almost no room for doubt in the judge’s or jury’s mind. 

Civil court, on the other hand, operates on a lower standard of proof known as "the balance of probabilities." This means the judge only needs to be convinced that it’s more likely than not—just 51% probable—that domestic violence occurred. Because of this lower threshold, civil courts can make findings of abuse even if a criminal court couldn’t secure a conviction.  

In family court, the standard of proof is also the balance of probabilities, like it is in civil proceedings. This means that the judge must find one person's story more likely to be true than the other person’s story. Finding someone guilty of committing domestic violence within the family court proceeding is not as high of a bar as in criminal proceedings. The different standards between courts, therefore, may result in different outcomes.  

Why Do Criminal and Family Courts Have Different Outcomes? 

The key difference between criminal and family court outcomes lies in the burden of proof. In criminal cases, proving domestic violence beyond a reasonable doubt is notoriously difficult. Many cases involve situations where the only evidence is one person’s word against another’s, and other factors like fear, coercion, or lack of physical evidence can make it challenging to secure a conviction. 

In contrast, family court judges are concerned with the broader impact of domestic violence on the family, especially the children. They don’t need to prove beyond a doubt that violence occurred; they only need to believe it’s more likely than not. This allows family courts to address safety concerns and ensure that parenting decisions reflect the realities of domestic violence, even when there isn’t enough evidence for a criminal conviction. 

What the Law Says About Domestic Violence in Family Law 

Ontario family law, through the Divorce Act and the Family Law Act, explicitly addresses domestic violence. The law defines family violence broadly to include not only physical abuse but also emotional, psychological, and financial abuse, even if these actions don’t meet the threshold for criminal charges. 

This legislation ensures that family courts consider all forms of domestic violence—whether or not criminal charges were laid—when making decisions about custody and parenting arrangements. The safety and well-being of the children and other family members are always the top priority, which means that family courts don’t rely solely on the outcome of criminal proceedings. 

Key Cases That Define the Role of Criminal Findings in Family Court 

Several important cases demonstrate how criminal findings, or the lack thereof, don’t necessarily decide family law issues involving domestic violence. 

1. Batsinda v. Batsinda (2013) – This landmark case established that while criminal charges related to domestic violence can influence family court decisions, they don’t automatically decide custody or access to children. Even if someone isn’t convicted in criminal court, the family court can still find that domestic violence occurred. 

1. Khan v. Khan (2024) – In this case, the criminal charges were withdrawn, but the family court still found evidence of family violence based on the lower standard of proof. This case reaffirmed that a lack of criminal conviction doesn’t prevent the family court from making its own findings. 

1. Armstrong v. Coupland (2023) – The family court in this case emphasized that while allegations of domestic violence are critical in making decisions about custody and parenting time, the presence or absence of criminal charges doesn’t determine the outcome. The court must consider all evidence and prioritize the safety of the children. 

These cases show that family courts are tasked with independently assessing the facts and making decisions that serve the best interests of the family, regardless of what happens in criminal court. 

What Does This Mean for Families? 

For families dealing with domestic violence, it’s important to understand that a not-guilty verdict in criminal court doesn’t mean the issue is settled. Family courts are empowered to take a more comprehensive look at the situation, and their focus is on ensuring the safety and well-being of all family members, particularly children. 

In some cases, family courts can make findings of domestic violence even when criminal courts don’t. This is because family courts can consider a broader range of behavior, including emotional or financial abuse, and they use a lower standard of proof to assess these claims. 

The Importance of Legal Guidance 

If you or someone you know is navigating a family law matter involving domestic violence, it’s critical to seek the advice of a knowledgeable family lawyer. They can help you understand how family and criminal courts intersect, and ensure that your rights and safety are protected throughout the legal process.