Negligent Security: Is the Property Owner Liable if You Are Assaulted on Their Premises?, Canada Reviews

See all posts by Diamond and Diamond Lawyers

Toronto is a city of transit hubs, sprawling shopping centers, and underground parking garages. While the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) remains one of the safest urban regions in North America, incidents of violence, ranging from targeted assaults to crimes of opportunity, do occur in commercial spaces. When a person is attacked in a Scarborough retail plaza or a downtown office tower, the immediate focus is often on the criminal. However, there is a legal dimension that many victims overlook: the responsibility of the property’s owner or manager.

In Ontario, the law recognizes that safety is not just a matter of police intervention; it is a shared responsibility. If you are a victim of an assault on commercial property, you may have a legal claim against the owner under the concept of negligent security.

The Occupiers’ Liability Act: A Duty of Care

The foundation of property safety law in Ontario is the Occupiers’ Liability Act. This legislation requires anyone who “occupies” premises, which can include owners, tenants, or property managers, to ensure that people entering the premises are reasonably safe.

This duty of care does not mean that a landlord is an absolute insurer of your safety. They cannot prevent every random act of violence. However, they are required to take “reasonable” steps to protect visitors from foreseeable harm. This includes harm caused by the intentional acts of third parties, such as muggers or trespassers.

The legal question hinges on whether the risk of an assault was foreseeable and whether the landlord did enough to mitigate that risk. If a landlord knows that a specific parking garage has been the site of multiple robberies but fails to fix broken lights or add patrols, they may be found liable for subsequent attacks.

Defining Foreseeability in the GTA

To win a negligent security case, a plaintiff must provide proof that the property owner should have anticipated the danger. In the context of Toronto’s real estate landscape, courts look at several factors:

• History of Crime: Has the property or the immediate surrounding area seen similar incidents? A plaza in a high-crime neighborhood requires more robust security measures than a small boutique in a quiet residential area.
• Property Character: Certain environments are naturally more prone to danger. Underground parkades, stairwells with poor sightlines, and ATM lobbies are high-risk areas that require higher monitoring standards.
• Prior Warnings: If tenants have complained about unauthorized individuals loitering or broken locks, and the management ignores these reports, they are essentially inviting liability.

According to a Statistics Canada report on urban safety, police-reported crime rates in major metropolitan areas can vary significantly by neighborhood, which influences how “foreseeable” crime is in a specific postal code.

Reasonable Steps to Prevent Violence

What does “reasonable” look like in practice? It is the difference between a proactive landlord and an indifferent one. Courts will often examine whether a landlord took reasonable steps to deter foreseeable violence, such as ensuring adequate lighting, hiring security personnel, or installing commercial access control systems to prevent unauthorized entry into private office buildings or parkades.

Other common security measures include:

• Active Video Surveillance: High-definition cameras that are regularly monitored or reviewed.
• Clear Line of Sight: Trimming overgrown bushes or removing architectural barriers where attackers could hide.
• Security Patrols: Regular rounds by uniformed guards to provide a visible deterrent.
• Prompt Maintenance: Fixing broken fences, gates, and door latches immediately.

When these systems fail or are nonexistent, the property owner creates an environment where crime can flourish. In legal terms, this is often called “creating a trap.”

Proving Negligence After an Assault

Proving a case is more complex than simply showing that an assault happened. A victim must demonstrate a direct link between the lack of security and the injury.

For example, if an attacker entered a luxury condo lobby in Yorkville because the front door lock was broken for three weeks, the victim has a strong argument. If the attacker followed a resident through a functioning door (a practice known as “tailgating”), the landlord’s liability becomes harder to prove, though not impossible if they failed to warn residents about the risks.

The Canadian Forum on Civil Justice notes that personal injury and safety-related legal issues are among the most difficult for Canadians to navigate without proper representation, highlighting the importance of gathering evidence immediately following an incident.

Case Study: The Commercial Parking Garage

Parking garages are among the most common sites for negligent security litigation in Toronto. The combination of isolation, poor acoustics, and limited exits makes them attractive targets for criminals.

Suppose a shopper is assaulted in a retail plaza garage. During the discovery phase of a lawsuit, it was revealed that the garage’s CCTV system had been non-functional for 6 months to save on repair costs. Furthermore, the garage had dim lighting that did not meet the standards set by the Illuminating Engineering Society (IES). Under these circumstances, an Ontario court is likely to find the property manager negligent. Their failure to maintain basic safety standards provided the opportunity for the crime to occur.

Beyond the Physical: The Impact of Trauma

The “damages” in these cases are not limited to physical injuries like bruises or broken bones. Victims of violent crime often suffer from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), anxiety, and a loss of a sense of security. In Ontario, compensation in negligent security cases can cover:

• Medical expenses and rehabilitation.
• Lost wages if the victim is unable to return to work.
• Pain and suffering.
• Psychological counseling costs.

For many survivors, the legal process is about more than money; it is about holding a negligent corporation accountable so that the same thing does not happen to someone else.

The Role of Local Ordinances

Toronto also has specific bylaws that affect property maintenance. The Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 629, also known as the Property Standards Bylaw, mandates that all parts of a property be kept in a “safe condition.” While this is often cited in slip-and-fall cases involving ice or broken stairs, it also applies to a building’s structural integrity. A landlord who violates these bylaws by leaving a building’s perimeter unsecured is not just being a bad neighbor, they are breaking the law.

Data from the Toronto Police Service Public Safety Data Portal shows that “Crimes Against the Person” are tracked with precision across the city’s 158 neighborhoods. This data is often used by legal experts to establish whether a property owner should have been on high alert due to rising local crime trends.

Taking Action: Steps for Victims

If you or a loved one is assaulted on a commercial property, the steps you take in the immediate aftermath are vital for a future legal claim:

• Report the Crime: Call 911 immediately. A police report is an essential piece of evidence.
• Seek Medical Care: A medical record establishes the physical toll of the event.
• Document the Scene: If possible, take photos of the area where the assault happened. Note any burnt-out lights, propped-open doors, or lack of security cameras.
  Identify Witnesses: Get contact details for people who saw the incident or the perpetrator.
• Consult a Professional: Negligent security law is specialized. Speaking with a lawyer who understands the Occupiers’ Liability Act is necessary to determine if you have a viable case.

Securing Accountability in an Evolving Urban Landscape

As Toronto continues to grow and densify, the pressure on commercial landlords to maintain safe environments increases. We live in a city where we should feel safe grabbing groceries at 9:00 PM or walking to our cars after a late shift at the office.

When property owners prioritize profit margins over the safety of the people who use their spaces, they must be held responsible. Negligent security litigation serves as a vital check on corporate negligence, ensuring that “reasonable care” remains a standard, not a suggestion. By understanding your rights, you contribute to a culture of safety that protects every resident across the GTA.

The Support You Need to Move Forward

Navigating the complexities of the Occupiers’ Liability Act and proving negligence in a court of law requires deep legal expertise and a commitment to victim advocacy. If you have been injured due to a property owner’s failure to provide adequate security, you don’t have to face the legal system alone.

If you or a loved one has been a victim of an assault on a commercial property, reach out to the experienced team at Diamond and Diamond. Our lawyers understand the nuances of negligent security cases in Ontario and are dedicated to fighting for the justice you deserve. Call us today at 1-800-567-HURT or visit our website to schedule a free consultation and learn more about your legal options.

About Jeremy Diamond