The trial of five former Canada world junior hockey players accused of sexually assaulting a woman in a London, Ontario hotel room in June 2018 ended on June 24, 2025. In her decision, Justice Carroccia stated, “concerning the charges before this court, having found that I cannot rely upon the evidence of E.M. […] I conclude that the Crown cannot meet its onus on any of the counts before me.”[1]
This criminal trial followed a civil lawsuit that resulted in a settlement between Hockey Canada and the complainant, E.M., whose identity is protected. Given the high-profile nature of this matter, this case has led to important discussions about how sexual assault trials are conducted. The decision to pursue a criminal trial and/or civil sexual assault lawsuit often rests on the important ways in which they differ.
After weeks of questioning faced by the complainant, many were left with the impression that the criminal justice system is hostile and re-traumatizing for victims of sexual violence. This is furthered by the fact that the accused do not have to testify in criminal trials, as their freedom is at stake.
For many reasons, including the intimidating nature of the criminal process, many cases of sexual abuse go unreported, leaving victims feeling they have no good options unless they pursue criminal charges. While getting a criminal conviction is important to ensure accountability, it is not the only option for victims of sexual abuse.
A common misconception is that civil sexual assault trials rely on a criminal conviction. This is not true. A civil lawsuit can still proceed even after a not-guilty verdict in a criminal trial or if no criminal trial ever happens. A criminal conviction is not required to pursue a civil lawsuit when it comes to sexual abuse. Understanding the differences between these two paths is essential.
In a criminal sexual assault case, the Crown must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt:
- Sexual touching occurred,
- It was non-consensual, and
- The accused knew or should have known that there was no consent.
During the trial, the accused has the right to remain silent while the complainant testifies publicly. Although victims often have their identities kept private, the trial itself is open to the public. The Crown’s role is to act in the public interest, focusing on the law rather than the individual complainant. It can be difficult to understand, but the focus of a criminal sexual assault trial is mainly on the accused, not the victim.
In contrast, a civil sexual assault lawsuit is between the parties involved, and the main goal is to financially compensate the victim or settle the issue. While a criminal conviction can help in this process, it is not a requirement. A civil lawsuit can be successful without a criminal trial, or even with a not-guilty verdict.
Though civil lawsuits can also carry the risk of re-traumatization, they differ in significant ways. The burden of proof in civil lawsuits is lower than in criminal cases. In a civil lawsuit, the plaintiff must prove their case based on a “balance of probabilities,” unlike the higher standard of “beyond a reasonable doubt” in criminal trials. Once the plaintiff presents evidence that the sexual incident(s) occurred, the defendant must prove that consent existed or that they reasonably believed there was consent. Unlike in criminal cases, the accused in a civil case cannot remain silent; they must prove the acts were consensual.
In the context of the Hockey Canada trial, the civil lawsuit was settled before the criminal case was reopened. This illustrates how a criminal conviction is not necessary to pursue a civil sexual assault lawsuit. What matters most is that the victim can make informed choices about how to move forward with their case.
If you or someone you know has experienced sexual assault and would like to consult with a lawyer, consider reaching out to Siskinds’ experienced sexual abuse lawyers. More information is available here.
This blog was edited with the use of Grammarly to enhance accessibility.
[1] Hockey Canada live updates: Judge says complainant appeared sober on night of alleged assault – The Globe and Mail