Helpful?
Yes No Share to Facebook

Adverse Inference:

Negative Presumptions for Failing to Present Evidence



Last Updated: June 11 2026

Question: What is an adverse inference in Ontario civil litigation, and how can it affect my case?

Answer: An adverse inference is a court’s discretionary presumption that missing documents or absent testimony you were expected to produce would have been unfavourable, which can weaken your position in settlement talks or at trial.   For practical guidance on evidence collection, disclosure, and next steps, contact VP Legal Services & Notary for Paralegal and Notary Services across Ontario and call (437) 286-1499 to get started quickly.

Understanding the Principle of Adverse Inference as an Evidentiary Rule Arising from Failure to Produce Evidence

Adverse Inference: Negative Presumptions for Failing to Present Evidence An adverse inference may arise where a party fails to testify, or where a party fails to lead evidence that is in control of the evidence, and from such a failure the court may thereby presume that the reason for the absence of the evidence or the absence of testimony is that such would negatively affect the party who fails to provide the testimony or the evidence.

The Law

An adverse inference presumption arises from the expectation that where a litigant is in possession of evidence or control of a witness, the litigant would provide the evidence or present the witness unless the evidence or witness is harmful to the case of the litigant.  The legal doctrine was provided within the cases of, among others, Tiwari v. Chevalier, 2022 ONSC 3071, and Lane v. Kock, 2015 ONSC 1972, which respectively stated:


[28]  Adverse inferences may be drawn from a party’s failure to produce relevant documents they were required to produce or should have produced. (Sarzynick v. Skwarchuk, 2021 BCSC 443, at para. 190.)


[3]  The effect of the failure of a party to testify or to call a material witness or other evidence, is summarized as follows in Sydney N. Lederman, Alan W. Bryant & Michelle K. Fuerst, The Law of Evidence in Canada, 4th ed. (Markham: LexisNexis Canada, 2014) at p. 386:

In civil cases, an unfavourable inference can be drawn when, in the absence of an explanation, a party litigant does not testify, or fails to provide affidavit evidence on an application, or fails to call a witness who would have knowledge of the facts and would be assumed to be willing to assist that party.  In the same vein, an adverse inference may be drawn against a party who does not call a material witness over whom he or she has exclusive control and does not explain it away.  Such failure amounts to an implied admission that the evidence of the absent witness would be contrary to the party's case, or at least would not support it.

The choice to apply an adverse inference is discretion as was explained within the Court of Appeal case of Parris v. Laidley, 2012 ONCA 755, wherein it was said:


[2]  Drawing adverse inferences from failure to produce evidence is discretionary.  The inference should not be drawn unless it is warranted in all the circumstances.  What is required is a case-specific inquiry into the circumstances including, but not only, whether there was a legitimate explanation for failing to call the witness, whether the witness was within the exclusive control of the party against whom the adverse inference is sought to be drawn, or equally available to both parties, and whether the witness has key evidence to provide or is the best person to provide the evidence in issue.

Summary Comment

The principle of adverse inference is the legal version of saying, if you got it, then flaunt it; and, if a party fails to do so, the court may presume that a party who fails to use evidence does so because the evidence would be unfavourable.

Get a FREE ¼ HOUR CONSULTATION

At
Our Desk Now!
Need Help? Let's Get Started Today

NOTE: Do not send confidential information through the web form.  Use the web form only for your introduction.   Learn Why?
6

NOTE: A significant amount of online searches relating to “lawyers near me” or “best lawyer in” typically indicate a desire for prompt and competent legal assistance rather than a particular designation.  In Ontario, “licensed paralegals” fall under the regulation of the same Law Society that governs lawyers and they possess the authority to advocate for clients in specific litigation scenarios.  Skills in advocacy, legal evaluation, and procedural knowledge are fundamental to this profession.  VP Legal Services & Notary offers legal representation within its licensed boundaries, focusing on strategic planning, evidence preparation, and compelling advocacy aimed at securing effective and beneficial outcomes for clients.

AR, BN, CA+|EN, DT, ES, FA, FR, GU, HE, HI
IT, KO, PA, PT, RU, TA, TL, UK, UR, VI, ZH
Send a Message to: VP Legal Services & Notary

NOTE: Do not send confidential details about your case.  Using this website does not establish a legal-representative/client relationship.  Use the website for your introduction with VP Legal Services & Notary. 
Privacy Policy & Cookies | Terms of Use Your IP Address is: 216.73.217.2
VP Legal Services & Notary

80 Carlauren Road, Suite 23
Woodbridge, Ontario,
L4L 7Z5
 
P: (437) 286-1499
E: vanessa@vplegal.services

Business Hours:

09:00AM - 08:00PM
09:00AM - 08:00PM
09:00AM - 08:00PM
09:00AM - 08:00PM
09:00AM - 08:00PM
Monday:
Tuesday:
Wednesday:
Thursday:
Friday:

By appointment only.  Call for details.
Messages may be left anytime.






Assistive Controls:  |   |  A A A