Therapist and patient in counseling session.

Mental and Psychological Damages: Harm You May Not See

07/14/2025 | The Cahill Firm |

Proving emotional distress and psychological injuries in Ontario cases can be complex, but the legal landscape has evolved significantly in recent years. This blog post provides a comprehensive overview of the law surrounding mental and psychological damages in Ontario, drawing on authoritative sources and recent case law.

Understanding Emotional Distress and Psychological Injury
Emotional distress, also known as mental suffering or psychological injury, is a legal term referring to the mental and emotional suffering a person experiences due to another party’s actions or negligence. These injuries can manifest in various forms, including anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and other mental health conditions. In Ontario, claims for emotional distress can arise from intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED) or negligent infliction of emotional distress (NIED).

Key Legal Principles and Landmark Cases
Several key legal principles and landmark cases shape the understanding and assessment of psychological injuries in Ontario.

  • Saadati v. Moorhead (2017 SCC 28): This Supreme Court of Canada case is a cornerstone in this area of law. It established that a recognized psychiatric illness is not a necessary precondition to recover damages for mental injury. Instead, the focus should be on the functional impact of the mental injury on the claimant’s life. The court outlined factors for determining whether a plaintiff has suffered a mental injury, including the duration of impairments, the impact of cognitive impairment on daily activities, and the psychological treatments pursued and their effects.
  • Mustapha v. Culligan of Canada Ltd. (2008 SCC 27): This case established that to recover compensation for mental injury, the injury must be severe, prolonged, and exceed everyday worries or fears. The law does not recognize mere emotional distress, such as agitation, as a true injury.
  • Bothwell v. London Health Sciences Centre (2023 ONCA 323): The Ontario Court of Appeal clarified that persistent feelings of sadness, anger, or frustration alone do not automatically qualify as a compensable mental injury. The court emphasized the importance of demonstrating the functional impact of the psychological distress, including impairment to cognitive functioning, interference with daily activities, and treatment.

Proving Emotional Distress in Court
Proving emotional distress in court requires demonstrating a clear link between the defendant’s actions and the plaintiff’s suffering. This involves presenting evidence to support the claim.

  • Medical Documentation: Psychiatric evaluations, therapy records, and medical reports are crucial in establishing the existence and history of a psychological injury.
  • Expert Testimony: Mental health professionals can provide expert testimony to attest to the severity of the emotional distress and its impact.
  • Personal Impact Evidence: Demonstrating how the distress has affected daily life, work, and relationships is essential.
  • Witness Testimony: Testimony from friends, family members, and colleagues can provide valuable insight into the changes in the claimant’s behaviour, mood, and ability to function before and after the incident.

Factors Affecting Compensation
Determining compensation for emotional distress varies widely, with awards ranging from modest sums to substantial amounts. The severity and duration of the distress, its impact on daily life and professional abilities, and the strength of the evidence and documentation all influence the compensation awarded.

Intentional Infliction of Mental Suffering
The tort of intentional infliction of mental suffering has three elements: (i) the defendant’s conduct was flagrant and outrageous; (ii) the conduct was calculated to harm; and (iii) the conduct caused the plaintiff to suffer a visible and provable illness. The “visible and provable illness” does not require expert medical evidence. It is satisfied when depression or physical illness results from the conduct.

Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress
Emotional distress may also be compensable in negligence cases if: (i) the defendant owed a duty of care to the plaintiff; (ii) the defendant’s conduct breached that duty; and (iii) the plaintiff suffered a recognized psychiatric injury as a result.

If you are experiencing mental or psychological harm as a result of the actions or negligence of another, then speak with Adam T. Higgins today about how the Cahill Firm can assist you.