Sexual Assault Defence Lawyers in Toronto

Charges of sexual assault can include allegations of sexual interference. We frequently handle allegations of sexual assault that have been advanced which are false and used for other motives against the accused. This may include family members, co-workers or ex-lovers. The Firm has also been retained to handled allegations of sexual assault before charges have been laid.

In 2025, the Firm defended a client charged with numerous child sexual offences including luring a child, make available sexual material to a child, possession of child pornography, accessing child pornography, sexual interference, sexual assault, and invitation to sexual touching in R. v. V.D. [2025]. The client was charged after engaging in an inappropriate relationship that involved exchanging inappropriate messages and media content and culminated in a physical encounter. The client was in a position of trust and authority over the complainant at the time they met, which the Crown cited as an aggravating factor in the case. The parents of the complainant reported the matter to police after discovering the relationship. The Firm carefully reviewed the disclosure evidence, uncovering issues with the Crown’s case. The Firm also employed risk malmanagement strategies before successfully securing the withdrawal of six of the charges against the client.

In 2021, the Firm represented an individual charged with one count of sexual assault and two counts of assault in R. v. Y.F. [2021], after allegedly sexually assaulting and choking the complainant. Text message evidence was tendered, and experts were hired by both the Crown and Defence. After two years of litigation and 7 days of trial the accused was acquitted of sexual assault and assault at trial.

In 2021, Donich Law defended a client who allegedly inappropriately touched a friend without consent and was charged with sexual assault in R. v. D.P. [2021]. After a psychological assessment of the accused that raised concerns of underlying mental health issues, the Firm was able to add context to the alleged assault and the Crown agreed to withdraw the charge.

In January 2020, the Firm secured an acquittal related to sexual assault and forcible confinement in Toronto in its R. v. M.Z. [2020]. The accused owned several restaurants in Toronto and was alleged to have sexually assaulted an employee in his office. After a year of litigation, the Firm managed to prove at trial the complainant was not telling the truth during cross-examination, and all charges were dismissed.

The following week in January 2020, the Firm secured a further acquittal of sexual assault in Toronto in its R. v. K.H. [2020]. The accused was a successful businessman from the United States visiting Toronto and was alleged to have sexually assaulted the complainant in a hotel. The matter still proceeded with both parties residing outside the country for a year.

In August 2017, after 3 years of litigation in its R. v. M.M. [2017], the Firm secured a withdrawal of a historical sexual interference and sexual assault from and allegation in 1977 when the complainant was 5 years old, the allegation was made nearly 40 years later.

In its R. v. W.C. [2017], it defended a dated allegation of incest from the complainant’s father from the 1980s. The charge was ultimately withdrawn after approximately 2 years of litigation. Defending historical allegations of sexual assault are difficult. The defence must always have a theory as to why the complainant would advance these allegations. It’s not effective enough to simply raise a reasonable doubt without a strong theory of the defence.

In the Firm’s R. v. D.D. [2018], it secured an acquittal in Toronto after a multi-day trial. The accused was alleged to have committed sexual assault on a minor 20 years ago. The Firm was able to establish through cross-examination the complainant was not credible and honest in the evidence provided. The complainant also advanced another allegation of sexual assault against another accused who was before the court at the same time. The two events were unrelated, but being litigated simultaneously. The accused testified with independent defence witnesses and was believed.

In the Firm’s R. v. Y.E. [2017], it prevented a sexual assault charge from being laid against a prominent Toronto Realtor, after proving the allegation was fabricated in a sex tape. We were able to provide this evidence directly to the investigating officer discrediting the complainant even before charges were laid. This avoided the court litigation and the accused being fingerprinted and photographed.

In November 2015, the Firm secured a withdrawal of several counts of sexual assault on two separate complainants in its R. v. K.C. [2015]. Through affidavit evidence, the Firm was able to defeat the allegations without a trial. The outcome was achieved through independent counsel where the Firm ultimately established the allegations were not as described and motivated by a falling out between a circle of friends.

In the Firm’s R. v. Z.C. [2018], it secured a withdrawal of 11 Sexual Assault and Sexual Interference charges advance by multiple child complainants against a close family member. The allegations were being advanced by 3 separate complainants. Defending charges with multiple complainants is difficult because the Crown will often advance a similar fact application which will be used to bolster the credibility of the complainants and Crown theory.

In 2022, the Firm defended an individual charged with assault (choking), assault, sexual assault, cruelty to animals and assault with a weapon in R. v. A.B. [2022]. The accused was charged after allegedly assaulting his wife, children, and the family dog and the Crown was seeking a significant penitentiary sentence. After significant Crown delay, the Firm set dates to make an 11(b) argument, leading to the Crown significantly reducing their position. The Firm ultimately secured the withdrawal of the assault (choking), sexual assault, cruelty to animals and assault with a weapon charges.

In 2021, the Firm represented an accused charged with sexual assault after allegedly assaulting an ex-wife during a domestic dispute in R. v. C.B. [2021]. Donich Law proposed a s. 276 application as a strategic defence which would provide the alleged victim with independent legal counsel. The Firm also discovered false allegations of domestic abuse previously made by the complainant. The Firm participated in roughly 18 months of Crown pre-trials and was able to exploit weaknesses in the Crown’s case to secure a withdrawal.

The Firm has also defended Civil Actions of historical sexual assault which often arise in the context of criminal proceedings. These claims often seek millions in damages and face similar trial challenges associated with criminal defence. It’s is not uncommon for the accused to be prosecuted criminally, only to be served with a Statement of Claim once the sentence is complete. Depending on how the criminal case is handled, it could adversely affect the probability of success for the civil proceedings.

The Firm has considerable experience defending allegation of historical sexual assault and related offences. In July 2019. In the Firm’s R. v. A.E. [2019], it was able to secure a withdrawal of several child sex related offences in Perth, Ontario. The accused was now an adult, and facing allegations related to events which allegedly occurred in 1985. Over a period of a year through the court process, the Firm established the allegations were false and motivated by a family dispute related to a large inheritance.

The same month, the Firm further secured a withdrawal of sexual assault against the owner of a private hotel in Toronto, where the accused was previously investigated 2 years prior by Toronto Police for an incident with another complainant in its R. v. T.K. [2019]. Law enforcement even used the unusual procedure of requiring the accused to take a lie detector test. The firm was able to establish based on its theory that the allegations were false.

In 2016, after a multi-day trial in Toronto it secured an acquittal on several child sex related offences which allegedly occurred over a decade prior in its R. v. D.N. [2016]. Through cross-examination, the Firm was able to establish the complainant was not being honest, the defence used evidence obtained through private investigation to achieve this outcome. The accused was acquitted of sexual assault, invitation to sexual touching, and sexual interference.

In November, 2016, the Firm secured a withdrawal of Nine Sex Offences against a Toronto TTC Driver, including Luring in its R. v. A.H. [2016]. This outcome was achieved by providing independent affidavit evidence through external counsel. The complainant who was a child at the time, indicated the allegations were not true and advanced by a falling out she had with her parents.

In March 2018, the Firm stayed a sexual assault and forcible confinement allegation in a Swiss Chalet washroom against a co-worker who was having a secret affair with the complainant. The case was further complicated because the police produced evidence of a text message apology by the accused. The Firm conducted a complex s.276 application and recovered forensic data from a cloud backup ultimately showing the complainant deleted other exculpatory text messages in its R. v. S.L. [2018].