A broken nose and a deep cut can both follow a single punch, and yet they may lead to very different charges. The same fight outside a Brampton bar could produce a simple assault charge, assault causing bodily harm, or aggravated assault. Often the difference has less to do with how angry anyone was and more to do with what the doctor found afterward.
That is why these two offences deserve their own discussion. Both sit well above a basic assault charge, and both are treated seriously by police and prosecutors in Peel Region. But the step from section 267 of the Criminal Code to section 268 changes the maximum sentence, how the case moves through the courts, and what kinds of sentences are possible at the end.
This article is general information only and should not be taken as legal advice. The right approach to any charge depends on the evidence, and that evidence is different in every case.
The Common Starting Point
Both offences start with an assault. Under section 265, that generally means intentionally applying force to someone without their consent, or threatening to do so in a way that causes them to reasonably believe you can carry it out. Everything else builds from there.
Assault causing bodily harm sits in section 267(b). “Bodily harm” has a specific definition in section 2: any hurt or injury that interferes with a person’s health or comfort and that is more than merely transient or trifling. Courts have applied that wording to a range of injuries, and they can include psychological harm. A sore arm that is fine the next morning may not meet the test. A fractured finger, a concussion, or injuries requiring stitches may well do so. There is no list, and the question is one of fact.
Aggravated assault is in section 268. It applies to someone who “wounds, maims, disfigures or endangers the life of” the complainant. Any one of the four is enough:
- Wounding usually means breaking the skin in a way that is more than trivial, such as a stab wound or a deep laceration.
- Maiming involves a lasting injury that impairs a person’s ability to fight or defend themselves, such as the loss or crippling of a limb.
- Disfiguring points to more than a temporary change in appearance, such as serious scarring.
- Endangering life does not depend on the type of injury. It looks at whether the assault put the person’s life at risk, which can arise even where the visible harm is limited.
Foresight: You Do Not Need to Intend the Injury
People often say, “I never meant to hurt him that badly.” It is an honest and understandable thing to say, but it is seldom a complete answer. For these offences, the Crown generally must prove the intentional assault and that a reasonable person would have foreseen a risk of bodily harm. The Crown does not usually have to prove you intended or foresaw the specific injury that resulted.
So a single shove that sends someone backward onto a concrete curb could, on some facts, support a serious charge even though the person who pushed never imagined a skull fracture. Causation can still be argued. If the injury came from something else, or if the shove was not a significant cause of it, that matters. But the argument has to rest on evidence, not simply on what you intended.
Why the Medical Evidence Often Decides the Label
Because the charge depends on the injury, the medical records can matter as much as any witness. In a Brampton case, that could mean records from Brampton Civic Hospital, from a walk-in clinic, or from a family doctor. A defence lawyer will often want to look closely at them, and for good reason.
Several questions tend to arise:
- When was the injury first documented? A long gap between the incident and treatment raises the possibility of another cause.
- What did the patient tell the doctor? The account given at triage may differ from the police statement.
- Is the injury consistent with the version alleged? An injury may fit a fall as readily as a punch. Sometimes only an expert can address this.
- Is there a prior condition? Earlier injuries can complicate claims about what this incident caused.
- Did the wound require more than cleaning? For a wounding allegation, the depth and treatment may be relevant.
Photos matter, too. Police photographs taken hours after an incident may show a very different picture from those taken days later, when bruising has developed. Ask early what exists and when it was created. Crown disclosure should include what police have gathered, but hospital records and expert issues can take time and sometimes require a further request or a court application.
Charges can also shift as this evidence develops. An aggravated assault charge may end up as assault causing bodily harm, or the reverse can occur if an injury proves worse than first thought. Any resolution talks with the Crown frequently turn on the medical picture, although nobody can promise a particular result.
Defences That Tend to Come Up
The usual assault defences apply. A separate article on this site covers them generally, so here the focus is on how they play out when an injury is serious.
Self-defence. Under section 34, the question is whether you reasonably believed force or a threat of force was being used against you or someone else, acted to defend, and did something reasonable in the circumstances. A serious injury does not defeat the defence, but a court will look closely at proportionality. Using a weapon, continuing after the danger passed, and who started the confrontation can all affect the analysis.
Consent. People can consent to some physical contact, such as in sports. There are limits, and consent may not protect a person who intended and caused serious harm in a fist fight. A “we both agreed to step outside” account is seldom as protective as people think.
Identification. In a crowded parking lot or a late-night fight, who actually landed the blow can be a true issue. Video from nearby businesses is often decisive, and it is frequently overwritten quickly, so tell your lawyer right away about any cameras nearby.
Intoxication. Being drunk is generally no defence to these offences. Courts usually treat them as requiring only a general intent, and self-induced intoxication will not ordinarily excuse the conduct.
How Each Charge Moves Through Court
Section 267 is a hybrid offence. The Crown chooses whether to proceed by summary conviction or by indictment. If it proceeds by indictment, the maximum is 10 years. Summary proceedings carry a much lower ceiling, generally a maximum fine of $5,000, up to two years less a day in custody, or both, and they are heard in the Ontario Court of Justice at 7755 Hurontario Street.
Section 268 can be prosecuted only by indictment, with a maximum of 14 years. That brings two important process differences. First, an accused person usually has an election on how to be tried, including before a judge alone or a judge and jury in the Superior Court of Justice. Second, because the maximum reaches 14 years, a preliminary inquiry can be requested. That hearing tests whether there is enough evidence to send the matter to trial, and it can be a valuable chance to hear witnesses under oath before the trial begins. Assault causing bodily harm does not qualify for one, because its maximum is 10 years.
The Sentencing Line That Matters Most
The 14-year maximum also has a major sentencing consequence. Under section 730, a discharge is not available for an offence punishable by 14 years or more. A person found guilty of aggravated assault cannot receive an absolute or conditional discharge, even with no record and strong mitigating facts. That person will have a conviction.
For assault causing bodily harm, a discharge remains legally possible where it is in the person’s best interests and not contrary to the public interest. That difference alone can make the charge’s label one of the most important issues in the file, particularly for someone whose job, professional licence or immigration status could be affected by a conviction.
Conditional sentences, served in the community, may be available for both offences where the court imposes less than two years and the other conditions in section 742.1 are met. Whether that is suitable depends on the facts. Violence involving a weapon or a severe, permanent injury can push a sentence toward actual custody, and a first-time offender does not automatically avoid jail.
Other orders can follow. These include probation, a no-contact order, a DNA order, and a weapons prohibition. Section 109 makes a prohibition mandatory for certain indictable offences involving violence where the maximum is 10 years or more, so this is worth asking about at the outset, especially if you hunt or hold a firearms licence. A court may also consider restitution for out-of-pocket losses from the injury, such as lost income, where the amount can be readily determined.
Consequences Beyond the Courtroom
For a permanent resident or foreign national, these charges carry special risk. Because the maximums reach 10 and 14 years, both can fall under “serious criminality” in Canada’s immigration law, even where the Crown proceeds summarily on a hybrid offence and even where the actual sentence is short. Anyone without citizenship should raise this with a lawyer before any plea or resolution, and should confirm the current rules with IRCC or immigration counsel.
Bail conditions can also disrupt daily life right away. If the complainant is a coworker, a neighbour or a family member, a no-contact term may keep you from a job or your home. Those conditions can sometimes be changed, but you must follow them until a court or the proper process changes them. Breaching one is a separate charge, and a message saying “sorry” counts as contact.
What to Do in the First Few Days
Write down what happened while you remember it, and address the note to your lawyer. Record the names of witnesses and any place that may have a camera. Take photos of your own injuries, since they can support a self-defence claim, and see a doctor if you need to. Keep off social media, and do not discuss the incident with friends who may become witnesses. If Peel Regional Police ask for a statement, you are entitled to speak with a lawyer first, and it is usually wise to do so before saying anything about what happened.
Then get advice specific to the charge you are facing. If you would like to learn more, our page on assault charges explains how we approach these files, and the Brampton office page has details on where to find us. No lawyer can promise how a case will end, but a careful look at the injury evidence and the choice of charge should come early.