The ordinary peace bond, contained in s. 810 of the Criminal Code, has a long history. It has its origins in a 1361 British statute, and a version of it was included in the original 1892 Criminal Code. However, specialized peace bonds are more recent additions to our preventive justice arsenal. The oldest one (s. 810.1) was created in 1993, and the newest one (s. 810.03) came into force in April 2025.
Section 810: Ordinary peace bonds
Section 810 of the Code provides statutory authority to impose an ordinary peace bond. This provision has undergone several amendments since it appeared in the first Criminal Code in 1892. The process commences with an informant swearing an information before a justice attesting to their reasonable fear that the defendant will cause harm. There are limits on who the informant may be, and limits on the kind of harm that will suffice. The informant must be:
- A person who fears on reasonable grounds that the defendant will cause personal injury to them or their intimate partner or child, or will damage their property.
- A person acting on behalf of the person described above.
- Any person who fears on reasonable grounds that the defendant will commit an offence under s. 162.1 (distribution of an intimate image without consent).
The justice who receives the information must cause the parties to appear before them or before a Summary Conviction Court. If the justice/court is satisfied of the requisite fear, they may order that the defendant enter into a recognizance (peace bond) with a maximum duration of 12 months, with or without sureties, to keep the peace and be of good behaviour. Additional discretionary conditions may also be imposed.
Section 810.01 peace bonds: Criminal organization and s. 423.1 (intimidation) offences
Section 810.01 peace bonds were created in 1997 as part of Bill C-95, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (criminal organizations) and to amend other Acts in consequence, S.C. 1997, c. 23. Bill C-95 was a response to the internecine gang war in Quebec between the Hells Angels and the Rock Machine outlaw motorcycle gangs. It contained strong punitive measures against criminal organizations, and it also created s. 810.01, a new specialized peace bond based on a reasonable fear that the defendant will commit a criminal organization offence. In 2001, s. 810.01 was broadened to also apply where there is a reasonable fear that the defendant will commit the offence of intimidate justice participant, contrary to s. 423.1 of the Code.
Section 810.01 peace bonds include several procedural elements that distinguish them from ordinary peace bonds issued under s. 810:
- They can only be issued by a provincial court judge, not by any other justice.
- Attorney general consent is required before the information may be laid.
- Anyone with the requisite fear can swear the information; the information need not be sworn by the person who may be harmed by the defendant, or by someone acting on that person’s behalf.
- Once the information is received, the judge has the discretion whether to require the parties to appear (for ordinary peace bonds, appearance before a justice is mandatory).
Section 810:011 peace bonds: Terrorism offences
Terrorism peace bonds first appeared in the Criminal Code as part of the 2001 Anti-terrorism Act, S.C. 2001, c. 41, which came into force shortly after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the United States. They were amended in 2015 in the Anti-terrorism Act, S.C. 2015, c. 20, following the terrorist attacks in October 2014 on Parliament Hill and in Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, Que.
Under s. 810.011, a peace bond can issue if the judge is satisfied that the informant “fears on reasonable grounds that another person may commit a terrorism offence.” This possibility-based standard, created as part of the 2015 amendments, is unique among the peace bonds; all the other peace bonds may issue only if there are reasonable grounds that the defendant will commit the requisite offence. By making this change, Parliament, “infused the concept of ‘mere possibility’ into s. 810.011,” and thereby lowered the threshold for issuance of a terrorism peace bond. This change reflects “the necessity for the state to stem rapidly emerging and evolving hostile actions that impact the security of the nation”: Canada (AG) v. Driver, 2016 MBPC 3, 324 Man.R. (2d) 222.
While the maximum duration of a s. 810.011 peace bond is ordinarily up to 12 months, the judge may extend this to up to five years if the defendant has previously been convicted of a terrorism offence. This is the longest statutory peace bond available in the Code.
Section 810.02 peace bonds: Forced marriage and child marriage
Section 810.02 peace bonds were created in 2015 as part of the Zero Tolerance for Barbaric Cultural Practices Act, S.C. 2015, c. 29. It introduced a new peace bond, in s. 810.02 of the Code, empowering the court to impose conditions on a person where there are reasonable grounds to fear that a forced marriage or child marriage will otherwise occur.
Section 810.02 peace bonds have narrow application. They only apply if there are reasonable grounds to fear an offence under ss. 293.1 (forced marriage), 293.2 (child marriage) or 273.3(1)(d) (removing a person from Canada for forced marriage or child marriage).
Similar to the other specialized peace bonds, s. 810.02 peace bonds may only be issued by a provincial court judge, and their duration may be extended if the defendant has a criminal record for one of the requisite offences.
There are no reported cases of the use of s. 810.02 peace bonds in the decade since they were created.
Section 810.03 peace bonds: Intimate partner violence and child abuse
Section 810.03 peace bonds are very recent. They were created as part of Bill S-205, S.C. 2024, c. 22, which received royal assent on Oct. 10, 2024, and came into force on April 8, 2025.
Section 810.03 peace bonds apply in cases of intimate partner violence (IPV) and child abuse. They were created in response to the increasing use of s. 810 peace bonds in IPV cases. They may only be issued by provincial court judges. The information may be laid by anyone who reasonably fears that the defendant will cause personal injury to their spouse or a related child. This may include the police or even concerned family members or friends, with or without the support of the person who may be harmed. This is an important element, because s. 810 informations may only be laid by or on behalf of the person who may be harmed. This may limit their utility in cases where an IPV victim is reluctant to come forward and seek the protection of the court.
Section 810.1 peace bonds: Serious child sexual offences
Section 810.1 peace bonds were the first specialized peace bonds. They were enacted in 1993 as part of a group of Criminal Code amendments designed to offer greater protection to women and children. Their overriding objective is the protection of children from the risk of sexual offences. They are available where the informant reasonably fears that the defendant will commit a child sexual offence. They mitigate this risk principally with conditions designed to separate the defendant from children, “in an effort to prevent even the temptation of criminal conduct”: R. v. Budreo (1996), 27 O.R. (3d) 347 (Gen. Div.), affirmed (2000), 46 O.R. (3d) 481 (C.A.), leave to appeal dismissed [2000] S.C.C.A. No. 542. There is no requirement to name the defendant’s potential victims. Indeed, in many cases it would be impossible to do so, as the threat posed by the defendant may arise in respect of children at large. Their ordinary duration is a maximum of 12 months, but this may be extended to up to 24 months if the defendant has a previous conviction for a child sexual offence.
Section 810.2 peace bonds: Serious personal injury offences
Section 810.2 peace bonds were created in 1997 as part of the same legislative package that created the long-term offender provisions. Section 810.2 was modelled after s. 810.1 but with a focus on violent offenders, including sex offenders, rather than child sex offenders. They are available when the informant reasonably fears that the defendant will commit a serious personal injury offence, as defined in s. 752 of the Criminal Code.
There are many similarities between s. 810.2 peace bonds and s. 810.1 peace bonds: the defendant’s potential victims need not be named; the peace bonds are often imposed where an offender has served their entire sentence until warrant expiry and is facing release into the community; breaches are taken very seriously, often resulting in sentences of two to three years’ imprisonment; and the maximum duration of a s. 810.2 peace bond increases to up to 24 months if the defendant has a previous conviction for a serious personal injury offence. However, unlike s. 810.1, s. 810.2 requires that the information may only be laid with the consent of the attorney general.
Randy Schwartz is the Assistant Deputy Attorney General – Criminal Law Division, Ministry of the Attorney General of Ontario. In this capacity he leads the largest criminal prosecution service in Canada. He has worked as a prosecutor throughout his entire career, since his call to the bar in 1999. Prior to his current role, he held many positions, including Crown Counsel, General Counsel, Deputy Director, Crown Law Office – Criminal, and Director, Crown Law Office – Criminal. He has appeared for the Crown in all levels of court.
He will be a member of faculty at the July National Criminal Law Program (NCLP) in Vancouver where he will be covering this topic. Register here. LexisNexis, which publishes Law360 Canada, is a sponsor of the NCLP.
The opinions expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the author’s firm, its clients, Law360 Canada, LexisNexis Canada or any of its or their respective affiliates. This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice.
Interested in writing for us? To learn more about how you can add your voice to Law360 Canada contact Analysis Editor Peter Carter at peter.carter@lexisnexis.ca or call 647-776-6740.