Supreme Court Judgments

Decision Information

Decision Content

SUPREME COURT OF CANADA

 

Citation: R. v. Vrbanic*

 

 

Appeal Heard and Judgment Rendered: December 4, 2025

Reasons for Judgment: to follow

Docket: 41741

 

Between:

 

His Majesty The King in Right of Canada

Appellant

 

and

 

Robert Vrbanic and

Sarah Josipovic

Respondents

 

- and -

 

Attorney General of Ontario,

Attorney General of Quebec,

Attorney General of Manitoba,

Attorney General of British Columbia,

Director of Criminal and Penal Prosecutions,

Battered Women’s Support Services Association,

Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police and

Criminal Lawyers’ Association (Ontario)

Interveners

 

 

 

Coram: Wagner C.J. and Karakatsanis, Côté, Rowe, Martin, Kasirer, Jamal, O’Bonsawin and Moreau JJ.

 

Unanimous Judgment Read By:

(para. 1)

 

Wagner C.J.

Counsel:

 

Jennifer Conroy and Ian Bell, for the appellant.

Jeff Marshman, Daniel Goldbloom and Alexa Klein, for the respondents.

Jeremy Tatum, Akshay Aurora and Philippe Cowle, for the intervener Attorney General of Ontario.

Sylvain Leboeuf and François Hénault, for the intervener Attorney General of Quebec.

Joel N. Myskiw and Michael Bodner, for the intervener Attorney General of Manitoba.

Lesley Ruzicka, K.C., and Mark Sheardown, for the intervener Attorney General of British Columbia.

Xavier Lyonnais and Daphné Godin-Garito, for the intervener Director of Criminal and Penal Prosecutions.

Caitlin Ohama-Darcus and Abbey Fortin, for the intervener Battered Women’s Support Services Association.

Elaine Ahn, for the intervener Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police.

Frank Addario and Nikolas De Stefano, for the intervener Criminal Lawyers’ Association (Ontario).

 

 

 

Note: This document is subject to editorial revision before its reproduction in final form in the Canada Supreme Court Reports.

 

* Neutral citation to follow.

 

 

 

 


 

No. 41741     

 

December 5, 2025

 

Le 5 décembre 2025

 

 

 

Coram: Wagner C.J. and Karakatsanis, Côté, Rowe, Martin, Kasirer, Jamal, O’Bonsawin and Moreau JJ.

 

Coram : Le juge en chef Wagner et les juges Karakatsanis, Côté, Rowe, Martin, Kasirer, Jamal, O’Bonsawin et Moreau

 

 

 

 

BETWEEN:

 

His Majesty The King in Right of Canada

Appellant

- and -

 

Robert Vrbanic and Sarah Josipovic

Respondents

 

- and -

 

Attorney General of Ontario, Attorney General of Quebec, Attorney General of Manitoba, Attorney General of British Columbia, Director of Criminal and Penal Prosecutions, Battered Women’s Support Services Association, Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police and Criminal Lawyers’ Association (Ontario)

 

Interveners

 

 

ENTRE :

 

Sa Majesté le Roi du chef du Canada

Appelant

- et -

 

Robert Vrbanic et Sarah Josipovic

Intimés

 

- et -

 

Procureur général de l’Ontario, procureur général du Québec, procureur général du Manitoba, procureur général de la Colombie-Britannique, directeur des poursuites criminelles et pénales, Battered Women’s Support Services Association, Association canadienne des chefs de police et Criminal Lawyers’ Association (Ontario)

 

Intervenants

 

 

 

JUDGMENT

 

The appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario, Number COA-23-CR-0524, 2025 ONCA 151, dated February 28, 2025, was heard on December 4, 2025, and the Court on that day delivered the following judgment orally:

 

 

The Chief Justice We are all of the view to allow the appeal, to set aside the order of a stay, and to remit this matter back for trial. Reasons to follow.

 

JUGEMENT

 

L’appel interjeté contre l’arrêt de la Cour d’appel de l’Ontario, numéro COA-23-CR-0524, 2025 ONCA 151, daté du 28 février 2025, a été entendu le 4 décembre 2025 et la Cour a prononcé oralement le même jour le jugement suivant :

 

[traduction]

Le juge en chef — Nous sommes toutes et tous d’avis d’accueillir le pourvoi, d’annuler l’ordonnance d’arrêt des procédures et de renvoyer l’affaire à procès. Motifs à suivre.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C.J.C.

J.C.C.

 

 

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.