By Kris Bonn
Public roads, sidewalks, trails, and recreational facilities are designed to bring people together and keep communities connected. In Ontario, municipalities bear much of the responsibility for ensuring that these spaces remain safe for everyone who uses them. However, when an injury occurs because of a hazard on public property, it often raises questions about where municipal responsibility begins and ends.
Like private property owners, municipalities must follow legal duties set out in provincial legislation. These rules not only define how far a municipality’s obligation extends but also set out clear limits on when it may be held liable for injuries. For local governments, this balance between public safety, reasonable maintenance, and legal exposure is part of daily operations.
Issues like icy sidewalks, potholes, and worn infrastructure often bring this duty into focus. When an injury occurs, understanding the law is critical for municipal staff, councils, and the communities they serve.
Municipal leaders, public works managers, and front-line staff all face the same practical question: How can they meet legal duties and keep their citizens safe without stretching limited budgets beyond capacity? Exploring the legal framework and best practices can help communities manage this responsibility more effectively.
Where Municipal Liability Begins
Two core laws shape municipal liability: the Municipal Act, 2001 and the Occupiers’ Liability Act.
Under Section 44 of the Municipal Act, municipalities have a statutory duty to keep highways, which include roads, sidewalks, and bridges, in a reasonable state of repair. If they fail to meet this standard and someone is injured as a result, the municipality can be liable for damages.
The Occupiers’ Liability Act broadens this duty of care. As an “occupier,” a municipality must take reasonable steps to make sure that any of the premises under its ownership or control are safe for visitors. This can apply to places like community centres, sidewalks, trails, and outdoor recreational facilities, to name a few. Common claims include slips and falls on icy sidewalks and walkways, injuries caused by hazards like potholes, broken steps in public buildings, or unsafe playground equipment.
Properly maintaining public property is no small task. Municipalities must balance limited budgets, wide-ranging infrastructure, unpredictable weather, and the expectations of residents who rely on these spaces every day. In practice, fulfilling these legal duties means balancing what is reasonable and practical. Municipalities must constantly adjust plans for seasonal changes, population growth, and new uses of public spaces. Whether in small towns or large cities, the basic duty to keep people safe remains the same.
Why Municipal Liability Is Unique
Claims involving municipal property are governed by rules that do not apply to private property owners. One of the most significant differences is the strict notice requirement that is outlined under the Municipal Act, 2001. An individual who intends to pursue an injury claim related to a road or sidewalk must typically deliver written notice to the municipality within 10 days of the incident. The rationale behind this requirement is that it gives municipalities a fair chance to investigate conditions promptly while potential evidence is still available.
Beyond notice rules, municipalities may also rely on specific statutory defences. For example, the Minimum Maintenance Standards for Municipal Highways set out clear timelines for tasks like snow clearing and pothole repairs. If a municipality can show that it met these standards, it can successfully defend a claim, even if someone was injured.
Another important factor is how courts assess policy and operational decisions. Courts recognize that municipalities must make policy choices about how to allocate resources, set budgets, or prioritize maintenance. If these policy decisions are made honestly and in good faith, they are generally protected from liability. However, once a policy is in place, the way municipal staff carry out day-to-day operations must meet the standard of reasonable care. The Supreme Court clarified this distinction in Nelson (City) v. Marchi, 2021 SCC 41. Poor execution of an otherwise valid policy can still lead to liability if it causes harm.
These legal defences and requirements exist to protect municipalities from unfair burdens while still holding them accountable for reasonable care. Understanding how courts interpret policy versus operations helps municipal staff make clearer decisions about inspections, repairs, and resource allocation.
Challenges in Proving Fault
Personal injury claims against municipalities can be more complex than claims involving private property. Strict timelines are only one barrier. Recent cases such as Psaila v. Kapsalis and City of Toronto and Graham v. Toronto (City) show that Ontario courts will enforce notice requirements rigorously. Claimants must explain any delay and prove that the municipality was not prejudiced by late notice.
Beyond timing, evidence is key. Injured individuals must show that the municipality knew, or reasonably should have known, about the unsafe condition and failed to fix it within a reasonable time. This often involves requesting municipal maintenance logs, weather records, inspection schedules, or records of previous complaints, which are documents that the municipality controls.
In cases involving winter hazards such as snow or ice, a municipality’s ability to show compliance with the Minimum Maintenance Standards can be decisive. Courts usually accept that meeting these standards satisfies the legal duty of care, unless there is strong evidence that the standards themselves were unreasonable in the circumstances.
In many cases, even if a claim proceeds, the cost and time involved can be significant. This makes early legal advice and clear documentation essential for both sides when municipal liability is in question.
Proactive Risk Management
Clear policies and documented practices are the strongest tools municipalities have to limit exposure and improve public safety. Well-developed winter maintenance plans, clear inspection schedules, and detailed record-keeping all demonstrate that reasonable steps are being taken to maintain public property safely.
Programs such as the Ontario Good Roads Association’s Snow School train municipal staff in winter operations and record-keeping, helping municipalities align with statutory standards and industry best practices. Guides such as Good Practices for Winter Maintenance in Salt Vulnerable Areas, a collaborative effort from Ontario Good Roads Association and Conservation Ontario, also offer practical approaches to balancing road safety with environmental considerations.
Municipalities that stay current with training and share lessons learned across departments often see fewer claims and stronger defences when issues do reach court.
Many municipalities encourage residents to report hazards using online forms, hotlines, or dedicated apps. This reporting system can speed up responses to problems and demonstrate ongoing diligence if an injury claim later arises.
The Association of Municipalities of Ontario’s Future of Municipal Liability and Risk Management report emphasizes that proactive policies, regular staff training, and consistent documentation all help control rising liability costs and protect public safety at the same time.
Adapting to New Pressures
Ontario’s municipalities are managing new risks as climate patterns change. More frequent freeze-thaw cycles, heavier snowfalls, and extreme weather can create hazards faster than crews can address them. The Ontario Climate Change Adaptation and Resilience Act, 2024 requires municipalities to plan for these shifting conditions and protect infrastructure accordingly.
Urban planning trends are also adding new dimensions to risk management. Expanded bike lanes, pedestrian-only zones, and green infrastructure projects help make communities more livable, but they can also introduce new maintenance obligations and safety considerations.
Ontario’s policy review on municipal stormwater management reflects how climate change may increase pressure on aging drainage systems, sidewalks, and roads, which can affect liability if flooding or runoff causes unsafe conditions.
New pressures highlight the need for regular reviews of bylaws, maintenance schedules, and public education programs that remind residents about shared responsibilities in community safety.
Shared Responsibility for Safe Communities
Liability for injuries on municipal property reflects a delicate balance between community safety, practical maintenance, and the realities of operating within limited resources. Ontario’s municipalities must understand their duties and ensure that staff, systems, and policies are in place to meet them.
When maintenance standards are met, and residents are encouraged to report hazards, communities are safer, and claims become less likely. In the end, the responsibility for safe public spaces is shared; residents, municipal leaders, and front-line staff each have a role to play in keeping sidewalks clear, roads safe, and public places accessible to everyone.