When most people hear the word “assault,” they picture someone being punched, pushed, kicked, or otherwise physically touched.
But can assault be verbal when no physical contact takes place?
Under section 265(1)(b) of the Canadian Criminal Code, assault by threat requires an act or gesture.
Words can help explain the meaning of someone’s conduct, but words alone ordinarily do not satisfy this form of assault.
A person may still be charged with assault without touching anyone if threatening words are accompanied by an act or gesture and the person has, or causes the other person reasonably to believe they have, the present ability to use force.
Words alone may also lead to a separate charge of uttering threats.
The charge that may apply depends on what was said, how it was communicated, what the person did at the time, and the surrounding circumstances.
SCHEDULE A FREE CONSULTATION WITH A CRIMINAL DEFENCE LAWYER
“Verbal assault” is a common phrase, but it is not the name of a specific offence under the Criminal Code.
People often use the term to describe:
Although this conduct can be upsetting or frightening, not every hostile, insulting, or offensive statement is a criminal offence.
Police and courts must consider whether the conduct meets the legal requirements of assault, uttering threats, criminal harassment, harassing communications, or another specific offence.
The distinction matters because Canadian criminal law treats a threat accompanied by immediate physical conduct differently from a threat sent through a text message or communicated from another location.
SCHEDULE A FREE CONSULTATION WITH A CRIMINAL DEFENCE LAWYER
Section 265 of the Criminal Code describes three ways an assault may occur.
A person may commit assault by:
The first type involves physical contact.
The other forms show that an assault charge does not always require someone to be touched or physically injured.
However, assault based on a threat specifically requires an act or gesture.
Words can provide important context, but the words alone do not ordinarily establish assault under section 265(1)(b).
Yes.
A person can potentially be charged with assault even when no physical contact occurs.
Examples may include allegations that someone:
In these situations, the alleged assault is based on an attempt or threat to apply force rather than completed physical contact.
The accused must have had the present ability to carry out the threatened action or caused the other person to reasonably believe they had that ability.
A statement about something that may happen at an unknown point in the future is different from someone raising a fist and appearing ready to strike immediately.
Verbal threats can become relevant to an assault allegation when they explain the meaning of an accompanying act or gesture.
Consider the difference between these two situations.
In the first, someone says, “I’m going to punch you,” while walking away.
In the second, someone says the same thing while stepping forward with a raised fist.
The words may be identical, but the physical conduct changes how the incident could be interpreted.
In the second situation, the raised fist and forward movement may be viewed as a threat through an act or gesture.
Factors that may be considered include:
No single factor automatically determines whether an assault occurred.
The allegation must be assessed in its full context.
The difference generally comes down to the conduct involved and the legal elements of each offence.
An assault without contact requires an attempt or threat made through an act or gesture.
The accused must also have the present ability to apply force or cause the other person reasonably to believe they have that ability.
Uttering threats focuses on the communication itself.
The threat may be spoken, written, sent electronically, communicated through another person, or conveyed in another way.
Under section 264.1 of the Criminal Code, a person may commit an offence by knowingly uttering, conveying, or causing someone to receive a threat to:
This means the accused does not need to be physically near the recipient or appear able to carry out the threat immediately for an uttering threats allegation to arise.
| Assault Without Physical Contact | Uttering Threats |
| Requires an act or gesture | Can be based on communication alone |
| Focuses on an attempt or threat to apply force | Focuses on a prohibited threat |
| Present or reasonably perceived present ability matters | Immediate ability to carry out the threat is not required |
| Often arises during an in-person confrontation | Can occur in person, by phone, online, in writing, or through another person |
| Governed primarily by section 265 | Governed by section 264.1 |
The same incident may sometimes result in both charges if the alleged words and physical conduct support the legal requirements of each offence.
Not every angry, rude, offensive, or exaggerated statement amounts to uttering threats.
The words are considered objectively and in their full context.
The issue includes how a reasonable person aware of the circumstances would understand the communication.
The Crown must also prove the required intent.
It is not necessary to prove that the accused intended to carry out the threat.
However, the evidence must establish that the accused intended the words to intimidate or intended them to be taken seriously.
Context may include:
Saying that something was “just a joke” does not automatically resolve the allegation.
At the same time, an angry or offensive statement does not automatically establish the offence.
The words, intent, and surrounding circumstances must be considered together.
A threatening text message standing alone would not ordinarily satisfy the act-or-gesture requirement for assault under section 265(1)(b).
However, a threatening text may lead police to investigate other possible offences, including:
A message may also be used as evidence of:
The same considerations may apply to emails, social media messages, direct messages, voice notes, videos, and voicemails.
Verbal abuse is not a separate Criminal Code offence.
Yelling, swearing, insulting someone, or making demeaning comments may not be criminal on their own.
However, verbal conduct may become part of a criminal investigation when it includes prohibited threats, repeated harassment, harassing communications, or conduct connected to another offence.
Possible allegations may involve:
Harassing communications under section 372(3) has specific requirements.
The Crown must prove repeated telecommunications made without lawful excuse and with the intent to harass.
Verbal conduct can also have consequences outside criminal court.
It may affect family proceedings, employment, school discipline, protection orders, or professional licensing matters.
Criminal harassment is different from both assault and uttering threats.
Under section 264 of the Criminal Code, the offence may apply when a person knows that another person is harassed, or is reckless about whether they are harassed, and the conduct causes the other person reasonably to fear for their safety or the safety of someone they know.
The prohibited conduct can include:
Repeated conduct is expressly required for allegations based on following or communications.
Threatening conduct is addressed separately under the section and must be assessed according to its nature and the complete circumstances.
A single disagreement or insulting message will not necessarily meet the requirements of criminal harassment.
Yelling at someone is not ordinarily assault by itself.
The legal question is not simply whether the person spoke loudly or aggressively.
The issue is whether the accused attempted or threatened, through an act or gesture, to apply force and had, or caused the other person reasonably to believe they had, the present ability to do so.
For example, shouting during an argument may be unpleasant but may not constitute assault.
Shouting a threat while rushing toward someone with a raised fist could be treated differently because of the accompanying physical actions.
The content of the words may also lead to an uttering threats allegation even when the conduct does not amount to assault.
Threatening to punch someone may support an assault charge, but the words alone do not determine whether an assault occurred.
Police and courts may consider whether the threat was accompanied by conduct such as:
They may also consider whether the accused had the present ability to carry out the threat or caused the other person reasonably to believe they did.
When the threat is communicated from another location or refers to possible future harm, uttering threats may be more relevant than assault.
Cases involving words, threats, or gestures often depend heavily on context.
There may be no physical injury or medical record showing what happened.
Evidence may include:
An isolated screenshot, short recording, or selected portion of a conversation may not show the complete context.
Earlier or later communications may affect how a statement is interpreted.
The Crown must prove every element of the charged offence beyond a reasonable doubt.
For an assault allegation based on threatening conduct, the evidence must establish that:
For an uttering threats charge, the Crown must prove that:
A criminal charge is an allegation.
It does not establish that the offence occurred or that the accused is guilty.
The issues that may arise in response to an allegation depend on the evidence and the specific charge.
For an assault allegation based on words, the defence may dispute whether any act or gesture accompanied the statement.
The accused may not have had the present ability to apply force and may not have caused the other person reasonably to believe otherwise.
A partial recording, isolated message, or single statement may not reflect the full conversation or circumstances.
In an uttering threats case, the defence may argue that the accused did not intend the words to intimidate or be taken seriously.
Hostile, offensive, or angry words may not communicate a threat to cause death or bodily harm, damage property, or harm an animal.
There may be a dispute about who sent an online message, controlled an account, made a call, or spoke in a recording.
Witnesses may provide different descriptions of the words, gestures, distance, tone, and sequence of events.
When gestures or force were used in response to a perceived threat, self-defence or defence of another person may become relevant.
The conduct must meet the legal requirements of section 34 of the Criminal Code, including that the response was reasonable in the circumstances.
These issues do not apply in every case.
Their relevance depends on the charge, the disclosure, and the surrounding evidence.
An accusation involving threats or assault can escalate quickly, particularly after a domestic disagreement, workplace confrontation, road-rage incident, or conflict between neighbours.
Practical steps may include:
Contact that appears well-intentioned can still affect an investigation or prosecution.
Contact made in violation of a condition may also lead to an additional charge.
SCHEDULE A FREE CONSULTATION WITH A CRIMINAL DEFENCE LAWYER
Yes.
Assault and uttering threats may be charged together when the same incident allegedly involves both a prohibited threat and an act or gesture threatening the application of force.
For example, police may consider both offences when a person allegedly threatens bodily harm while moving toward someone with a raised weapon.
Whether both charges are laid or continued depends on the available evidence and whether the facts support the legal elements of each offence.
The phrase “verbal assault” can refer to several different types of allegations.
The legal issues may involve assault, uttering threats, criminal harassment, harassing communications, or a combination of offences.
The difference often depends on details such as:
Browne Criminal Defence represents people facing criminal allegations in Calgary, Alberta.
A criminal defence lawyer can review the disclosure, explain the charge, identify disputed issues, and discuss the court process and available options based on the circumstances.
SCHEDULE A FREE CONSULTATION WITH A CRIMINAL DEFENCE LAWYER
Words alone do not ordinarily constitute assault under section 265(1)(b) of the Criminal Code. Assault by threat requires an act or gesture, along with present ability or a reasonable belief in that ability. Verbal threats may still support an assault charge when they explain accompanying physical conduct. Words alone may instead lead to an uttering threats allegation.
It depends on the words, intent, and full context. The communication is assessed objectively, including whether a reasonable person aware of the circumstances would understand it as a threat. The Crown must also prove that the accused intended the words to intimidate or be taken seriously.
Follow all court orders and release conditions, preserve complete communications, avoid discussing the allegation online, and obtain legal advice before contacting the complainant or making further statements to police. If a no-contact condition applies, do not communicate directly or indirectly.
Assault generally involves intentionally applying force without consent or attempting or threatening to apply force through an act or gesture. Aggravated assault is a more serious offence under section 268 of the Criminal Code. It occurs when an assault wounds, maims, disfigures, or endangers the life of the complainant. An assault involving a weapon, choking, or bodily harm may instead fall under section 267, depending on the circumstances and injuries.
Yes. Assault generally involves applying force or attempting or threatening to apply force through an act or gesture. Criminal harassment involves conduct that causes someone to reasonably fear for their safety, such as repeatedly following or communicating with them, watching places they regularly attend, or engaging in threatening conduct. Everyday behaviour described as “harassment” does not automatically meet the Criminal Code definition. The same incident may result in both allegations if the evidence supports the elements of each offence.
Disclaimer
The information provided on this website is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Viewing this website, submitting an inquiry, or communicating with our firm through this site does not create a lawyer-client relationship. No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers. For advice tailored to your unique circumstances, please consult with our lawyers directly. Past results do not guarantee similar outcomes. This website may contain links to external resources; we do not endorse or assume responsibility for the accuracy of third-party content.