Offices in Ottawa and Perth
(613) 722-1500

CONTACT US (613) 722-1500

Share on twitter
Share on facebook
Share on linkedin

Judicial Notice of COVID-19 Facts

Share on twitter
Share on facebook
Share on linkedin
Share on email

Judicial Notice of COVID-19 Facts

Posted January 26, 2021

When parties want to rely on facts in court they need to prove them with evidence. However, some facts are so well known that judges can take “judicial notice” of them instead of requiring proof. R. v Find, 2001 SCC 32 tells us that: “a court may properly take judicial notice of facts that are either: (1) so notorious or generally accepted as not to be the subject of debate among reasonable persons; or (2) capable of immediate and accurate demonstration by resort to readily accessible sources of indisputable accuracy.”

During the current global pandemic, information about COVID-19 seems to be everywhere. Parties may wonder what information requires evidence and what information has become so pervasive that a court will take judicial notice.

J.E.S. v. S.S., 2020 ONSC 6064 provides some guidance on this subject. The Applicant asked the court to take judicial notice of fifteen facts about COVID-19.  The Court agreed to take judicial notice of four of them:

  • “COVID-19 is a highly contagious, life-threatening, respiratory disease that attacks adults and children; [i]t spreads through person to person contact and can also be spread through touching surfaces;
  • Cases in Ontario are on the rise again;
  • Public Health rules, protocols and warnings must be followed; and
  • Public Health requirements are intended to protect all members of the public.”

However, the Court refused to take judicial notice of:

  • Information that required medical evidence to prove, for example, the assertion that “[a[dults and children with certain pre-existing conditions are more at risk for the disease to be life-threatening; these conditions include heart disease, diabetes, asthma, and weak immune systems (immune-compromised)”;
  • Incorrect information;
  • Facts that were already in evidence through affidavits;
  • A list of COVID-19 symptoms because they were not “notorious” and the list presented differed from the list on the Ontario government’s website;
  • The Toronto District School Board’s list of COVID-19 precautions since the information was not “notorious nor… readily supported by sources of indisputable accuracy”; and
  • A summary of by-laws from the City of Toronto and orders from the federal government since “the full text of these instruments [was] available online.”

J.E.S. v. S.S., 2020 ONSC 6064, sheds some light on judicial notice of COVID-19 facts. However, parties should proceed cautiously. Different judges will have different ideas of what facts meet the definition of judicial notice. This is especially true in the COVID-19 environment where knowledge about the virus continues to grow and guidelines continue to evolve.  To be safe, parties should present evidence to support the COVID-19 facts they wish to rely on in court rather than relying on judicial notice.

This blog post was written by Kathleen Broschuk, a member of the Family Law team.  Kathleen can be reached at 613-369-0362 or at kathleen.broschuk@mannlawyers.com.

More Resources

Blog |
Employment, Labour, and Human Rights

By: 

Generally, the Employment Standards Act, 2000 (“ESA”) has been interpreted to protect non-unionized employees from “temporary” lay offs unless their employment contract permits such a[...]
Blog |
Business Law

By: 

Posted October 20, 2021

On October 19, 2021, the new Ontario Business Registry System launched. This new online registry now enables businesses and not-for-profit corporations to directly access services[...]
Blog |
Environmental Law

By: 

Posted October 14, 2021

In the decision of Greenpeace Canada (2471256 Canada Inc. v. Ontario (Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks), 2021 ONSC 4521, released September 3, 2021,[...]
Blog |
Employment, Labour, and Human Rights

By: 

Posted October 1, 2021

This blog continues our exploration of the potential employment law consequences stemming from the degree of control a party exerts within a variety of business[...]
Blog |
Personal Injury

By: 

Posted September 27, 2021

Personal Injury lawyers and their clients are all too familiar with the carnage and suffering caused by impaired drivers.  Canada has the worst rate of[...]
Blog |
Bankruptcy and Insolvency, Business Law

By: 

Posted September 24, 2021

As is noted by the Court of Appeal in McEwen (Re), released August 12, 2021, referred to here as “Traders”, the BIA is a complete[...]

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Name*
Consent*
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.