What You Need to Know About Canada’s Age of Consent Law
Rate this article
13
votes —
4.8
Updated:
5 days ago
Views:
31493
Sexual offence allegations involving minors are among the most serious criminal charges in Canada. A conviction can lead to mandatory jail time, registration on the national sex offender registry, restrictions on travel and employment, and long-term consequences that can reshape a person’s life.
Because of these high stakes, courts treat cases involving young people with exceptional scrutiny. Understanding how the age of consent works in Canadian law — including the exceptions, prohibited circumstances, and common defence strategies — is essential for anyone facing allegations connected to underage sexual activity.
Unlike many other criminal offences,
age-of-consent charges
do not focus on whether the complainant agreed. In many cases, consent is legally irrelevant, and even an honest misunderstanding of age may not protect the accused unless they took reasonable steps to determine the complainant’s age.
This comprehensive, evergreen guide explains:
What “age of consent” means under Canadian law
When the age increases from 16 to 18
How close-in-age exceptions work
What behaviour is prohibited regardless of consent
Mandatory minimum penalties for sexual offences involving minors
What mistakes or misunderstandings will courts not accept?
What evidence can help build a defence?
How experienced sexual assault lawyers challenge charges and negotiate outcomes
With decades of experience defending clients across the Greater Toronto Area, the
sexual assault defence lawyers at Mass Tsang LLP
have successfully handled some of Ontario’s most complex age-related sexual offence cases. Their work often hinges on accurately interpreting age-of-consent rules, exposing weaknesses in the Crown’s case, and ensuring that their clients’ rights are protected at every stage.
Key Takeaways
The general age of consent in Canada is 16, but it rises to 18 when the relationship involves authority, trust, dependency, or exploitation.
Close-in-age exceptions allow younger teens to consent to peers within limited age differences (14–15 can consent to partners <5 years older; 12–13 can consent to partners <2 years older).
Consent is not a defence when a complainant is under 16 (or under 18 in exploitative circumstances).
Believing someone “looked older” is not a defence unless the accused took reasonable steps to determine age.
Mandatory minimum sentences apply to many age-of-consent offences, including sexual interference, invitation to touching, and exposure to a person under 16.
Defence strategies often involve examining reasonable steps, evidence, credibility issues, digital communications, and Charter violations.
Early involvement of a defence lawyer significantly improves outcomes.
As
Jeff Mass
notes:
“Age-of-consent cases require precision. One misunderstanding, one assumption, or one poorly worded statement can decide a person’s entire future.”
Canada’s age of consent laws are designed to protect young people from exploitation and abuse. The courts treat sexual activity involving minors as a matter of public protection — not simply a private interaction between individuals.
Position of authority or trust
:
Sexual activity is illegal regardless of age if the older person is in a position of power, trust, authority, or dependency.
Sexual images and pornography
:
The age of consent for participating in or being depicted in sexual content is 18 years old.
These laws are enforced to prevent coercion and protect vulnerable youth.
Even if a young person appears mature, agrees, or initiates an activity, this does not constitute legal consent under age 16.
Why 16?
Canadian law aims to protect developing teens from older individuals who may influence, pressure, or manipulate them. Courts interpret these laws strictly, leaving very little flexibility.
When the Age of Consent Increases to 18
The age of consent rises to 18 in cases involving:
Positions of authority (teachers, managers, instructors, coaches, older family members)
Positions of trust (babysitters, mentors, counsellors)
Relationships of dependency (someone providing housing, financial support, supervision)
Situations of exploitation (manipulation, coercion, unequal power dynamics, grooming)
Even if the young person is 16 or 17, sexual activity may still be criminal if the older person has:
Influence
Supervision responsibility
Professional authority
Emotional power
Economic control
As
Robbie Tsang
explains:
“Exploitation isn’t just about age. It’s about power, vulnerability, and the ability to influence a young person’s decisions.”
Close-In-Age Exceptions (“Peer Exceptions”)
Canadian law recognizes that consensual sexual activity between teens is everyday and not inherently exploitative. Close-in-age exceptions prevent teenagers from being criminalized for consensual relationships.
Close-in-Age Rules
Age of Teen
Legal Consent Allowed With
Conditions
14–15 years old
Partner is less than 5 years older
No authority, trust, or exploitation
12–13 years old
Partner is less than 2 years older
No authority, trust, or exploitation
Under 12
Cannot consent to any sexual activity under any circumstances
No exceptions
Examples
A 15-year-old and a 19-year-old → legal (age gap ≤ 5 years)
A 15-year-old and a 21-year-old → illegal (age gap > 5 years)
A 13-year-old and a 14-year-old → legal (age gap < 2 years)
A 13-year-old and a 16-year-old → illegal (age gap > 2 years)
Offences Related to the Age of Consent
Many Criminal Code offences rely directly on the complainant’s age, not on questions of consent. Below is an overview of the most common charges.
1. Sexual Interference
A criminal offence involving any sexual touching of a person under 16.
Penalties:
Mandatory minimum: 6 months (summary) / 1 year (indictable)
Maximum: 14 years
2. Invitation to Sexual Touching
Inviting, encouraging, or persuading a person under 16 to engage in sexual touching.
Penalties:
Mandatory minimums identical to sexual interference
3. Sexual Exploitation (16–17 year olds)
Occurs when the accused is:
In a position of authority
In a position of trust
In a relationship of dependency
In an exploitative situation
Penalties:
Mandatory minimums
Up to 14 years imprisonment
4. Exposure (Indecent Acts to a Minor)
If committed in front of someone under 16, exposure is subject to a mandatory minimum jail term.
5. Child Luring & Sexual Communications
Sending messages, images, or requests of a sexual nature to a minor or someone believed to be a minor.
Penalties:
Extremely strict, often with mandatory minimum sentences.
6. Child Pornography / Sexting with a Minor
Creating, sharing, or possessing sexual images of anyone under 18.
Even teens who share images with peers can face charges.
Why “Consent” Is Not a Defence
For complainants under 16, consent does not matter — legally, morally, or factually.
Even if the young person:
Initiated the relationship
Lied about their age
Pursued or pressured the older person
Appeared mature
Gave explicit verbal or digital consent
The only defence is demonstrating that the accused:
Honestly believed the complainant was 16+, and
Took all reasonable steps to determine age.
This is a high threshold.
What Counts as “Reasonable Steps” to Determine Age?
Courts evaluate reasonableness based on objective behaviours.
May count as reasonable steps
Asking direct questions about age
Seeing a government-issued ID
Evidence that the complainant had access to age-restricted environments (bars, clubs, casinos)
Digital conversations discussing age
Testimony from witnesses who also believed the complainant was older
Age-of-consent cases can be complex. While the law is strict, the Crown still must prove:
Age
Identity
Sexual purpose
Authority/trust/exploitation (if applicable)
The accused did not take reasonable steps.
The acts occurred as described.
Defence lawyers examine:
Timeline inconsistencies
Missing digital evidence
Mixed messages
Changes in the complainant’s story
Lack of exploitative context
Texts showing mutual, equal communication
Evidence that age was discussed
Witnesses who believed both parties were the same age
Police procedural errors or Charter violations
How Mass Tsang LLP Builds a Strong Defence
Mass Tsang lawyers use proven defence strategies tailored to each case:
Conducting a meticulous review of all digital communications
Comparing the complainant’s statements for inconsistencies
Gathering witnesses who believed the complainant was older
Reconstructing timelines using phone logs, GPS, and social media
Filing a Charter challenge for unlawful search, seizure, or detention.
Challenging the Crown’s interpretation of “authority” or “exploitation.”
Demonstrating genuine mistaken belief supported by reasonable steps
Negotiating reduced charges or withdrawals where the case is weak
Their team has secured hundreds of withdrawals, reductions, stays, and acquittals for clients in the GTA.
Protect Your Rights — Contact a Sexual Assault Lawyer Early
If you are being investigated or have been charged:
Do
not
speak to the police
Do
not
message the complainant.
Do
not
delete digital evidence.
Do
not
explain yourself without counsel.
Early legal intervention can:
Protect your rights
Prevent missteps
Secure evidence helpful to your defence
Improve negotiation outcomes
Reduce exposure to mandatory jail time.
FAQ
What is the age of consent in Canada?
The general age of consent is 16, but it increases to 18 when the relationship involves authority, trust, dependency, or exploitation.
Can lying about age be used as a defence?
No. A mistaken belief in age is only a defence if the accused took reasonable steps to determine the complainant’s real age.
What are the close-in-age exceptions?
Fourteen- and fifteen-year-olds may consent to partners less than five years older, and twelve- and thirteen-year-olds may consent to partners less than two years older.
What penalties apply to age-of-consent offences?
Penalties include mandatory minimum jail sentences, registration on the national sex offender registry, travel restrictions, and a lifelong criminal record.
Can age-of-consent charges be withdrawn?
Yes. Charges may be withdrawn if the Crown has weak evidence, inconsistent testimony, or if police violated Charter rights during the investigation.
