Short answer: the Divorce Act defines family violence as any conduct by a family member toward another that is violent, threatening, or that constitutes a pattern of coercive and controlling behaviour, or that causes a family member to fear for their safety, whether or not the conduct is a criminal offence. The definition expressly reaches psychological abuse, financial abuse, harassment and stalking, threats against people, pets and property, and a child’s direct or indirect exposure to any of it. Courts must consider family violence in every best-interests analysis. What decides those cases is rarely a single dramatic incident. It is the record: dated, kept as things happened, and gathered without ever increasing the danger it documents.
The law finally names the pattern
Two things about the current law surprise people who lived through older versions of it. First, no criminal conviction, charge or police report is required for family violence to count in family court; the statute says so in terms. Second, the definition is built around patterns, not incidents: section 16(4) of the Divorce Act directs courts to consider the nature, seriousness and frequency of the conduct, whether there is a pattern of coercive and controlling behaviour, harm or fear caused, and whether the child was exposed. Ontario’s Children’s Law Reform Act carries the mirrored test for parents who were never married. On the criminal side, Parliament has enacted a dedicated coercive-control offence that is not yet in force; we track its status and what the offence will cover in our coercive control guide. For family court, none of that timing matters: the civil definition is in force now, and it is the one your parenting case runs on.
Evidence that carries weight
The strongest single artifact in most files is a contemporaneous log: dated entries, written the day things happen, in your own ordinary words, recording what was said and done, who was present, and how the children were involved or exposed. Alongside it, preserved communications, texts, emails, voicemails, kept in original form rather than retyped, because metadata is what defeats the accusation of fabrication. Photographs of damage, dated. Medical and counselling records where they exist. For financial abuse, the paper trail itself: accounts you were removed from, money withheld, debts created in your name, spending you were made to account for. Witnesses help more than people expect, neighbours, family, the friend who saw the aftermath, and part of building a record is simply noting who saw what, while memories are fresh.
Patterns need shape to be usable. A shoebox of screenshots is real but unreadable; the same material organized into a dated timeline, incident by incident with its supporting artifact attached, is what lets a lawyer draft an affidavit and a judge follow the pattern in one sitting.
Recording, and its limits
Canada’s one-party consent rule means you may lawfully record a conversation you are yourself part of, and in abuse situations such recordings sometimes capture what no log conveys. Two cautions before you rely on that. Legally, the rule stops at your own conversations: recording the other person’s calls or planting devices is criminal interception, and it hands the abusive party a weapon, a line we explain fully in our reference on recording conversations. Practically, family courts have mixed reactions to a household saturated with recordings, and being discovered recording can escalate danger. Treat recording as a narrow tool for specific moments, decided with your lawyer, never as a habit.
Where an investigator fits, and where we refuse to
Investigation in these files is support work around the record, chosen carefully because safety outranks evidence. Lawfully documenting breaches from public vantage points: the ex-partner who appears where a court order says they must not, timestamped and witnessed by a professional instead of by you. Sweeping for the surveillance so common in coercive-control situations: trackers on vehicles, stalkerware on phones, hidden devices in the home, through TSCM, paired with secure-communications help so your next steps stop being visible to the person they concern. Safe, documented service of court documents. Verification work that supports a safety plan, confirming where things stand without contact.
What we do not do is as important. We do not surveil an alleged abuser as a substitute for police response to active danger, we do not choreograph confrontations, and we scope everything so that nothing we do signals our client’s hand or raises their risk. Evidence that endangers the person it is meant to protect is failure, whatever it proves.
A note on safety
Evidence is never the first priority. If you are in immediate danger, call 911. If you are not in immediate danger but you are afraid, speak with a family lawyer about protective options, connect with a local support service, and keep your own safe, dated record of what is happening, stored somewhere the other person cannot reach, a separate email account, a trusted person’s home. You do not have to have the legal theory sorted, or a single page of evidence, before reaching out for help.
Not legal advice
This article is general information about the family-violence provisions in Canadian family law, not legal advice, and no article can assess risk in your situation. A family lawyer and, where there is danger, police and local support services come before any evidence-gathering decision.
Frequently asked questions
What counts as family violence in Canadian family court?
The Divorce Act defines it as conduct by a family member that is violent or threatening, that constitutes a pattern of coercive and controlling behaviour, or that causes a family member to fear for their safety, expressly including physical and sexual abuse, threats, harassment and stalking, psychological abuse, financial abuse, harm or threats to pets and property, and a child’s direct or indirect exposure to any of it. Ontario’s Children’s Law Reform Act mirrors the concept for parents who were never married.
Do I need a criminal conviction to prove abuse in family court?
No. The Divorce Act definition applies whether or not the conduct constitutes a criminal offence, and family courts decide on the civil standard using the evidence before them: contemporaneous records, communications, medical and financial records, witnesses. Police involvement can add evidence, but its absence does not erase a documented pattern.
Can I record my partner to prove abuse?
You may lawfully record conversations you are part of under Canada’s one-party consent rule, and such recordings are sometimes powerful. You may not record conversations you are not part of or plant listening devices, which is criminal interception. Courts react unevenly to heavy recording in family disputes, and discovery of recording can escalate danger, so treat it as a narrow, lawyer-guided tool rather than a default.
How can a private investigator help in a domestic abuse case without making things more dangerous?
By doing support work scoped around safety: documenting order breaches from public vantage points so the record does not depend on the victim’s own observation, sweeping vehicles, phones and homes for trackers and stalkerware, securing communications, serving documents safely, and verifying facts without contact. A professional file is scoped so nothing signals the client’s hand, and evidence-gathering never substitutes for police where there is active danger.
Sources
- Canada, Divorce Act, s. 2(1) (definition of "family violence", applicable whether or not the conduct is a criminal offence). Accessed August 7, 2026.
- Canada, Divorce Act, s. 16 (best-interests factors; s. 16(3)(j) and s. 16(4) family-violence considerations). Accessed August 7, 2026.
- Ontario, Children’s Law Reform Act, s. 24 (mirrored family-violence and best-interests provisions). Accessed August 7, 2026.