Updated: November 05, 2025
Legally Reviewed by Cory Wilson

The idea that a person’s home is their castle—a place they have the right to protect—is a familiar one in Canada. However, the term “castle doctrine” comes from the United States and is not used in Canadian law. 

In Canada, the right to defend yourself or your property is governed by the self-defence and defence-of-property provisions in the Criminal Code, which require that any force used be reasonable and necessary in the circumstances.

What is legally permitted for Canadian homeowners looking to defend themselves or their property? When do self-defence actions cross the line legally, and what are the consequences of doing so?

Let’s take a closer look at the castle doctrine and what it means for property owners in Alberta…

“Castle doctrine” explained…

The terms “castle doctrine”, “castle law”, and “stand your ground” often appear in U.S. news or social media discussions about self-defence. In many jurisdictions, it allows homeowners to use extreme force (even deadly force, if necessary) against intruders without a duty to retreat.

Many Canadians wonder if similar laws exist here. Similar principles apply but the approach is different from a legal perspective. No formal “castle law” or “stand your ground” law exists but provisions are made in the Criminal Code for self-defence and the defence of property.

Self-defence and defence of property laws in Canada

Canadian law aims to balance the right to defend oneself with the need to limit unnecessary force. Sections 34 and 35 of the Criminal Code of Canada deal with self-defence and the defence of property, which can be summarized as below:

• Section 34: Force may be used if you reasonably believe someone is using or is about to use unlawful force, and your response is necessary and reasonable.
• Section 35: Reasonable force may be used to protect property, prevent an unlawful entry, or remove a trespasser.

The use of the word “reasonable” in this legislation is significant. This subjective term frequently lies at the centre of cases involving self-defence or defence of property arguments. 

What is considered “reasonable” depends on the specific circumstances—including the nature of the threat, the accused’s perception of danger, and whether the response was proportionate to that threat. Typical considerations include:

• Was the action necessary? 
• How immediate and serious was the threat?
• Was the response proportional to the threat?
• Were alternative actions available, such as retreat?
• Were the accused’s actions intended to repel or to punish?
• Would an ordinary person in the same situation have felt the same level of threat and responded similarly?
• What was the relationship between the individuals involved?

The court assesses “reasonableness” both subjectively, from the perspective of the accused, and objectively, from the perspective of what an ordinary person would consider appropriate. 

This dual analysis often determines whether a claim of self-defence or defence of property succeeds in court.

Can you use force against an intruder in Canada?

Force may be justified when defending against an intruder in Alberta or anywhere in Canada. However, this only applies under specific circumstances, especially the use of lethal force.

For instance, Canadians do not have a blanket legal right to shoot an intruder in their home. If an unarmed intruder breaks into your home, the use of lethal force against the intruder would likely be deemed disproportionate to the threat. If the intruder was armed and there is a real, immediate threat to your (or someone else’s) life or of serious harm being caused, the use of lethal force may be considered proportionate and justified.

Cases depend on the specific circumstances, such as the intruder’s actions, the actions of the respondent, whether weapons were used, the physical abilities of those involved, the location, whether escape was possible, whether the police could have been called, and so on.

Lawful self-defence may lead to a police investigation and criminal charges, especially if serious injury or death results. The outcome of the case will depend on the circumstances and the specific actions of the defendant.

Key differences between Canadian and U.S. law

Even though Canada has no “stand your ground” or “castle doctrine” laws, Canadians are not legally required to retreat when threatened. However, in assessing a claim of self-defence or defence of property, the courts will consider whether it was reasonable to use force—including whether the person could have safely avoided the confrontation.

By contrast, in some U.S. jurisdictions, the law presumes a person is justified in using force, even deadly force, when an intruder enters their home. In Canada, there is no automatic presumption of justification. Instead, the law focuses on whether the accused’s response was proportionate and reasonable in the circumstances—a key distinction between Canadian and American approaches to self-defence.

What are the penalties for using excessive force in self-defence or defence of property?

If an individual is criminally charged and prosecuted for using excessive force even in self-defence, the Crown must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the individual’s actions were not justified. 

If convicted of a violent crime, such as assault, aggravated assault, manslaughter, or murder, a range of life-changing penalties may result. Some sample sentences in Canada include:

• Simple assault: Up to five years in prison (if prosecuted by indictment).
• Assault causing bodily harm: Up to 10 years in prison.
• Aggravated assault: Up to 14 years in prison.
• Manslaughter: Up to life imprisonment (no mandatory minimum unless a firearm was used).
• First or second-degree murder: Mandatory life imprisonment

The specific charge and accompanying penalties will depend on how excessive the force was and what injuries or consequences followed. In the least serious cases, penalties like probation, fines, or conditional sentences are common.

Cases often hinge on subtle judgments about what was “reasonable”. Because of the serious penalties involved with erring on the wrong side of the self-defence laws, it is essential to consult with a criminal defence lawyer as soon as possible after an arrest and charge.

Your lawyer will assess whether your actions meet the legal test for self-defence or defence of property, gather evidence and witness accounts, and advocate for the withdrawal or reduction of charges.

Call us to arrange a confidential consultation

To speak with Cory Wilson or arrange a free, no-obligation consultation with Wilson Criminal Defence, call 403-978-6052 or email us here.