Ontario Child Injury Lawyers
Serious Pediatric Injury Claims for Children and Families Across Ontario
Child injury claims in Ontario involve rules that do not apply in the same way to most adult personal injury cases.
A child usually cannot start, control, or settle a lawsuit alone. A parent may need to act as litigation guardian. A settlement for a child generally requires court approval under Rule 7.08 of Ontario’s Rules of Civil Procedure. Settlement funds are often paid into court under Rule 7.09, unless the court approves another arrangement. Limitation periods can also operate differently under the Limitations Act, 2002.
These rules affect who gives instructions, what evidence must be filed with the court, how settlement approval is obtained, how the child’s money is protected, and how the child’s future losses are assessed.
Foster Injury Law's Ontario personal injury lawyers represent injured children and their families across Ontario in serious child injury claims, including brain injuries, concussions, spinal cord injuries, fractures, amputations, pedestrian accidents, bicycle injuries, passenger injuries, daycare injuries, school injuries, boating accidents, camp injuries, sports injuries, and pediatric catastrophic injury claims.
Can a Child Sue for Personal Injury in Ontario?
Yes. A child can bring a personal injury claim in Ontario if the injury was caused by negligence. The defendant could be a driver, property owner, school, daycare, camp, municipality, sports organization, product manufacturer, business, or another person or organization responsible for the child’s injury.
Having had experienced a serious injury does not prove liability. The claim still has to show that the defendant owed a duty of care, failed to meet the required standard of care, and caused or contributed to the injury.
In child injury cases, evidence can disappear quickly. Video footage, witness names, incident reports, staff notes, school records, maintenance records, photographs, medical records, and records of prior complaints or similar incidents should be preserved as early as possible.
The Child Owns the Claim
The child is the injured person. The child’s damages for pain and suffering, future care, future income loss, permanent impairment, and other losses belong to the child.
Because a minor cannot usually conduct litigation alone, the lawsuit is normally brought through a litigation guardian. In most cases, the litigation guardian is a parent.
The litigation guardian provides instructions to the lawyer, assists with evidence, reviews legal advice, and makes decisions in the child’s best interests. That role is not the same as being the claimant. The parent is acting for the child.
This distinction matters at settlement. The legal question is not simply whether a parent wants the case resolved. The settlement has to be fair to the child.
Litigation Guardians Under Rule 7
Rule 7.01 of Ontario’s Rules of Civil Procedure requires a proceeding to be commenced, continued, or defended on behalf of a party under disability by a litigation guardian, unless the court orders otherwise or a statute provides otherwise.
A minor is a party under disability. That means a child plaintiff usually needs a litigation guardian before the lawsuit can proceed in court.
Rule 7.02 deals with litigation guardians for plaintiffs and applicants under disability. A person can act as litigation guardian for a child plaintiff without a court appointment only if the rule is followed.
For a minor plaintiff, the litigation guardian must file an affidavit. Rule 7.02(6) requires the affidavit to address specific information, including:
the litigation guardian’s consent to act;
confirmation that the litigation guardian has given written authority to a named lawyer;
evidence about the nature and extent of the disability;
the minor’s birth date;
whether the litigation guardian and minor ordinarily reside in Ontario;
the litigation guardian’s relationship to the minor;
confirmation that the litigation guardian has no interest adverse to the minor;
acknowledgment that the litigation guardian has been informed about potential personal liability for costs.
These requirements tell the court who is making decisions for the child, whether that person has authority to retain counsel, whether there is an adverse interest, and whether the person understands the responsibility of acting as litigation guardian.
Why the Litigation Guardian Affidavit Matters
The litigation guardian affidavit confirms that the person acting for the child is properly before the court and understands the role. It also requires the proposed litigation guardian to confirm that they have no interest adverse to the child.
That issue can matter in personal injury claims. A parent may have their own Family Law Act claim. A parent could be an important witness. In rare cases, a parent’s conduct, supervision, vehicle, insurance, or household circumstances may be connected to the accident.
Those issues do not automatically prevent a parent from acting as litigation guardian. They do need to be considered. The child’s interests come first. If there is a real conflict, another litigation guardian may be needed.
Court Approval of Settlements Under Rule 7.08
A settlement of a child’s personal injury claim generally requires court approval. Rule 7.08(1) of the Rules of Civil Procedure provides that a settlement of a claim by or against a person under disability is not binding on that person without the approval of a judge. A minor is a person under disability.
This is one of the major differences between an adult personal injury settlement and a child settlement. An adult claimant can usually settle by signing a release. A child usually cannot. The proposed settlement has to be put before a judge.
If a settlement is reached before a lawsuit has been started, approval can be sought by application.
Rule 7.08(4) sets out the materials required for settlement approval. The motion or application record must include:
a table of contents;
an affidavit from the litigation guardian setting out the material facts and the reasons supporting the proposed settlement;
an affidavit from the lawyer acting for the litigation guardian setting out the lawyer’s position on the proposed settlement;
the minor’s written consent, if the minor is over 16, unless the judge orders otherwise;
a copy of the proposed minutes of settlement.
The court does not see its role as providing the rubber-stamp for an agreement. The judge must have enough information to decide whether the settlement is fair to the child.
What Should Be in a Rule 7 Settlement Approval Record?
In serious child injury claims, the Rule 7 approval material should do more than say that the parent and lawyer recommend settlement.
The litigation guardian affidavit should explain the material facts. That usually includes the accident, the child’s injuries, treatment, recovery, ongoing symptoms, current function, and the reasons the litigation guardian supports the settlement.
The lawyer’s affidavit should explain counsel’s position on settlement. In a serious injury case, that may include liability risks, causation issues, contributory negligence allegations, damages evidence, expert reports, accident benefits, settlement negotiations, fees, disbursements, and the risks of continuing the lawsuit.
The record should also address the child-specific issues that often drive the value of the claim, including future care, attendant care, school disruption, psychological injury, developmental concerns, future surgeries, permanent impairment, loss of future earning capacity, accident benefits, and how settlement funds will be protected.
A weak Rule 7 record can hide the real issue: whether the settlement properly accounts for the child’s future.
The Court’s Protective Role
Court approval exists because minors and other parties under disability are legally vulnerable. The court’s role is protective. A judge reviewing a child’s settlement is not just recording that the parties reached an agreement. The judge is deciding whether the proposed settlement should bind the child.
The Ontario Superior Court of Justice’s Rule 7 settlement approval guidance says the record should give the judge enough information to decide whether the proposed settlement is reasonable and in the best interests of the minor plaintiff.
For injured children, that protective function is practical. The court needs enough evidence to understand the injury, the legal risks, the value of the claim, the child’s future needs, and the proposed handling of settlement funds.
Rule 7.09 and Money Paid Into Court
Rule 7.09 of the Rules of Civil Procedure deals with money payable to a person under disability. For minors, settlement money is often paid into court unless the court orders otherwise. The money is then held for the child, usually until the child turns 18.
This is important for parents to understand. The settlement money belongs to the child. It is not general family money.
In some cases, money can be accessed before the child turns 18 if it is needed for the child’s benefit. That may include treatment, therapy, equipment, education supports, medical expenses, or other needs connected to the injury. Ontario’s Minors’ Funds Program explains how money paid into court for a child can be held and how requests can be made to access funds for the child’s benefit.
For serious injuries, the handling of funds should be considered carefully. A child with a brain injury, spinal cord injury, amputation, serious orthopedic injury, or catastrophic impairment may need money preserved for future treatment, equipment, attendant care, housing changes, transportation, education support, and adult-life needs.
Why Early Settlement Offers Are Risky in Child Injury Claims
Early settlement offers are not always appropriate in pediatric injury claims since a child’s long-term condition may not be clear in the first few months or even years. A young child with a brain injury may not show the full academic or behavioural impact until school becomes more demanding. A serious fracture may appear healed on imaging but later cause pain, weakness, altered movement, deformity, or early arthritis. Psychological symptoms may become clearer after the immediate medical crisis has passed.
A settlement that only reflects the early recovery period can miss future treatment, future care, education supports, therapy, attendant care, vocational loss, long-term pain, reduced independence, future surgeries, and permanent impairment.
Once a settlement is approved and finalized, the child usually cannot return later for more compensation because the injury turned out to be worse than expected. That is why the Rule 7.08 record needs to be built carefully.
Limitation Periods for Injured Children
Limitation periods involving children are different from ordinary adult claims. Section 6 of the Limitations Act, 2002 provides that the limitation period does not run while a person with a claim is a minor and is not represented by a litigation guardian in relation to the claim.
Section 8 provides that, if a person is represented by a litigation guardian in relation to the claim, the discoverability rule in section 5 applies as if the litigation guardian were the person with the claim.
Section 9 allows a potential defendant, in certain circumstances, to bring an application or motion to have a litigation guardian appointed for a potential plaintiff where the running of the limitation period has been suspended or postponed under section 6 or 7.
Parents should not treat these rules as permission to wait.
Delay can still damage the case. Video can be erased. Witnesses can become impossible to locate. A damaged bicycle, helmet, vehicle, playground condition, sidewalk condition, roadway condition, or unsafe product can be lost or repaired. School and daycare records can become harder to obtain.
There may also be notice requirements or shorter timelines depending on the defendant, including claims involving municipalities or public property.
Negligence and the Standard of Care
Negligence depends on the setting. A driver near a school zone has different responsibilities than a daycare worker supervising toddlers.
A camp running a swimming activity has different responsibilities than a homeowner with an icy walkway. A municipality responsible for a playground, road, crosswalk, or sidewalk is in a different position than a sports organization running a practice.
The standard of care depends on the relationship, the activity, the child’s age, the known risks, and the surrounding circumstances.
In child injury claims, the evidence is usually designed to answer specific practical questions. Was the risk foreseeable? Was the child old enough to understand the danger? Was the activity suitable for the child’s age and ability? Was supervision adequate? Were safety rules followed? Was the property maintained? Was the equipment appropriate and safe? Were prior incidents or complaints ignored? Was the child placed in a situation beyond their training, maturity, or ability?
Negligent Supervision at Daycare, School, Camp, and Activities
Negligent supervision is often one of the main legal issues in child injury claims. Adults do not watch the children every second. The question is whether the supervision was reasonable for the child’s age, the activity, the number of children, the known risks, and the setting.
Toddlers on playground equipment requires different supervision than a teenager at sports practice. A swimming activity requires different precautions than a classroom activity. A child with known behavioural, medical, cognitive, or physical limitations may require closer supervision.
A negligent supervision claim could involve staff-to-child ratios, policies and procedures, training records, incident reports, prior complaints, inspection records, equipment maintenance records, witness statements, staff notes, video footage, and medical records.
The standard of care depends on what adults knew or should have known before the child was hurt.
Unsafe Property and Occupiers’ Liability
Child injury claims can also arise from unsafe property. This can include playgrounds, stairs, sidewalks, parking lots, daycare premises, school grounds, stores, recreation facilities, pools, camps, sports fields, apartment buildings, private homes, and municipal property.
A danger that might be obvious to an adult may not be obvious to a child. Poor maintenance, broken equipment, missing guards, unsafe surfaces, inadequate fencing, poor lighting, ice, water hazards, traffic flow, or inadequate warning signs can all become relevant.
The age of the child involved in a case matters. So does the reason the child was on the property, whether children were expected to be present, and whether the hazard should have been fixed or guarded against.
When an Insurer Says the Child Was Partly at Fault
Insurance companies like to argue that children are partly responsible for the accident. That argument should not be accepted without careful review.
A young child crossing a road, riding a bicycle, playing near traffic, using playground equipment, or reacting to danger is not assessed as if they were an adult.
Age, maturity, experience, supervision, road conditions, visibility, driver conduct, and the surrounding circumstances matter.
This is especially important in pedestrian and bicycle claims. Drivers must take proper care in places where children are likely to be present, including school zones, parks, playgrounds, residential streets, crosswalks, bus stops, driveways, and parking lots.
Contributory negligence reduces the value of a claim. It should not be conceded simply because an insurer alleges that the child should have known better.
Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Involving Children
Children are often injured as pedestrians, cyclists, passengers, rideshare passengers, or occupants of school transportation vehicles.
Children hit by a vehicle may have both an accident benefits claim and a lawsuit against an at-fault driver. A child injured as a passenger may have accident benefits available even if the at-fault driver was someone in the child’s own vehicle.
Fault does not prevent an injured child from applying for accident benefits in Ontario.
The lawsuit and accident benefits claim should be managed together. Treatment funding, medical evidence, liability, contributory negligence, catastrophic impairment, future care, and long-term damages can overlap.
In pedestrian and bicycle cases, early investigation is important. Evidence can include speed, lighting, sightlines, driver attention, road design, signage, crosswalk placement, school-zone conditions, nearby cameras, vehicle damage, helmet evidence, and witness statements.
ATV, Dirt Bike, and Snowmobile Injuries Involving Children
Children can suffer serious injuries while riding ATVs, dirt bikes, snowmobiles, or other recreational vehicles. These claims often involve head injuries, spinal injuries, fractures, internal injuries, amputations, and psychological trauma.
The legal issues depend on how the accident happened. A claim can involve negligent supervision, unsafe trails or property, a reckless operator, poor instruction, improper equipment, lack of age-appropriate safety precautions, mechanical problems, or another person allowing a child to operate a vehicle that was not suitable for their age, size, training, or experience.
These cases should be investigated early. Helmet evidence, vehicle condition, ownership, trail conditions, waiver documents, supervision, speed, passenger use, prior complaints, photographs, witness statements, and insurance coverage can all become important.
Children injured in an ATV, dirt bike, or snowmobile accident should not be treated as if they made the same risk assessment as an adult rider. Age, experience, supervision, property conditions, and the decisions made by the adults involved all matter.
Accident Benefits for Injured Children
A child injured in a motor vehicle accident can usually apply for accident benefits regardless of who caused the crash.
Accident benefits pay for treatment, rehabilitation, assessments, medical equipment, attendant care, and other supports available under the policy.
For children, accident benefits may need to address issues that do not fit neatly into an adult injury model. A child may need school accommodations, pediatric therapy, developmental monitoring, neuropsychological assessment, occupational therapy, speech-language therapy, psychological treatment, case management, or attendant care.
For a child with a serious brain injury or developmental impact, the catastrophic impairment analysis should not be treated as a generic adult assessment. Ontario’s Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule contains pediatric traumatic brain injury criteria and a developmental-implications rule for some impairments where the insured person was under 18 at the time of the accident.
Catastrophic Impairment in Child Brain Injury Claims
In Ontario motor vehicle accident cases, catastrophic impairment is a legal designation under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.
For accidents on or after June 1, 2016, the SABS has a separate traumatic brain injury test for an insured person who was under 18 at the time of the accident.
A child’s traumatic brain injury is catastrophic if one of the following applies:
the child is accepted for inpatient admission to a public hospital named in a Guideline and has positive CT, MRI, or other medically recognized brain imaging showing accident-related intracranial pathology, including findings such as intracranial contusions or hemorrhages, diffuse axonal injury, cerebral edema, midline shift, or pneumocephaly;
the child is accepted for inpatient admission to a neurological rehabilitation program in a pediatric rehabilitation facility that is a member of the Ontario Association of Children’s Rehabilitation Services;
one month or more after the accident, the child’s neurological function does not exceed category 2, Vegetative, on the King’s Outcome Scale for Childhood Head Injury;
six months or more after the accident, the child’s neurological function does not exceed category 3, Severe disability, on the King’s Outcome Scale for Childhood Head Injury;
nine months or more after the accident, the child’s level of function remains seriously impaired so that the child is not age-appropriately independent and requires in-person supervision or assistance for physical, cognitive, or behavioural impairments for the majority of the child’s waking day.
This is different from the adult traumatic brain injury test, which uses positive brain imaging and Glasgow Outcome Scale or Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale ratings for insured people who were 18 or older at the time of the accident.
The nine-month child criterion is especially important because it focuses on age-appropriate independence. The evidence should address the child’s age, supervision needs, school functioning, safety awareness, behaviour, physical assistance, cognitive limits, and daily activities.
The SABS also has a developmental-implications rule for some impairments where the insured person was under 18 at the time of the accident. If the impairment is not already catastrophic under the listed criteria, and the impairment can reasonably be believed to be catastrophic under the physical, combined physical/mental, or mental/behavioural categories, the impairment is treated as the most analogous impairment after considering the developmental implications of the impairment.
A catastrophic impairment designation can significantly increase the accident benefits available for treatment, rehabilitation, attendant care, assessments, case management, and long-term support.
Brain Injuries and Concussions in Children
Brain injuries in children are often underestimated because the child may look physically normal. A child may have headaches, dizziness, fatigue, sleep problems, light sensitivity, memory problems, emotional outbursts, behaviour changes, or trouble concentrating. Some children return to school but cannot tolerate screens, noise, homework, reading, tests, gym class, or sports.
A normal CT or MRI does not rule out a concussion or mild traumatic brain injury. Pediatric brain injury claims often turn on function, not just imaging.
The evidence includes emergency and family doctor records, pediatrician or specialist records, therapy records, school attendance records, report cards, teacher observations, return-to-learn plans, return-to-play restrictions, neuropsychological testing, and parent observations.
For younger children, the full effect may not appear until later developmental stages. Problems with attention, executive function, emotional regulation, learning, fatigue, and independence may become clearer only as school and life demands increase.
Permanent Injuries to Children
Some child injury claims involve permanent disability even outside the accident-benefits catastrophic impairment framework.
This can include spinal cord injuries, amputations, blindness, severe psychological injuries, serious orthopedic injuries, and other permanent impairments.
For children, permanent injury planning must account for growth and development. A young child’s needs will not stay the same. Equipment changes. Therapy changes. Housing needs change. School needs change. Personal care needs change. Transportation needs change.
A settlement or benefits plan should not treat the child’s current needs as fixed.
Fractures, Growth Plate Injuries, and Orthopedic Evidence
Some childhood fractures heal without lasting problems. Others create permanent limitations. Fractures involving growth plates, joints, the spine, pelvis, femur, ankle, wrist, or arm can affect strength, range of motion, gait, sports, school attendance, daily function, and future work.
Orthopedic evidence should look beyond the initial x-ray. Pain, stiffness, scarring, deformity, hardware, future surgery, altered movement, leg-length issues, activity restrictions, and early arthritis can affect the value of the claim.
A child’s age matters because the injury can affect growth and development. A fracture that appears resolved early may still have long-term consequences.
Spinal Cord Injuries and Long-Term Care
A child with a spinal cord injury may need rehabilitation, attendant care, mobility equipment, accessible housing, vehicle modifications, therapy, personal support, and long-term medical care. Those needs can change as the child grows.
Equipment has to be replaced. A home that works for a young child may not work for a teenager. School transportation, toileting, transfers, recreation, privacy, independence, and adult housing all need to be considered.
Psychological Injury and Trauma
Children struggle to describe emotional injuries. Parents may notice anxiety, nightmares, fear of traffic, sadness, anger, withdrawal, panic, sleep problems, school avoidance, irritability, or behaviour changes. Some children stop doing activities they used to enjoy. Others become embarrassed, frustrated, or fearful because they cannot keep up.
Psychological evidence is important if trauma affects school, treatment participation, social development, family life, or physical recovery. Counselling records, family doctor notes, psychological reports, school records, and parent observations can all help document those changes.
School Evidence, Development, and Future Earning Capacity
Report cards, attendance records, individualized education plans, psychoeducational assessments, therapy notes, teacher comments, and parent observations can show how the child changed after the accident.
Future earning capacity is difficult because the child may have no employment history. That does not mean the loss should be ignored.
Serious injuries affect education, career options, stamina, independence, physical capacity, and the ability to work full time as an adult.
The evidence may include medical opinions, neuropsychological testing, occupational therapy evidence, vocational evidence, educational evidence, and future care reports.
The task is not to predict the child’s entire life with certainty. The task is to build a fair record so the child’s future is not undervalued simply because the loss has not fully unfolded yet.
Claims by Parents and Family Members
Serious injuries to children affect the whole family. Parents often become caregivers, drivers, appointment coordinators, treatment advocates, school advocates, and emotional supports. They may miss work, pay expenses, lose sleep, and reorganize family life around the child’s recovery.
Parents and other family members may also have claims connected to the child’s injury, including certain expenses, care-related losses, and damages available to family members under Ontario law.
Those family claims should be reviewed alongside the child’s claim so that expenses, care, and family losses are not missed.
What Parents Should Do After a Serious Child Injury
Get medical care first. After that, preserve evidence. Keep hospital papers, referral notes, test results, photographs, receipts, school records, emails, text messages, incident reports, and video.
Write down symptoms, missed school, missed activities, behaviour changes, appointments, and expenses.
If the injury happened at a daycare, school, camp, business, playground, roadway, or property, ask for the incident report. If there may be video, ask that it be preserved immediately.
Be careful about recorded statements or early settlement discussions with an insurer before getting legal advice.
Child Injuries Involving Trucks and Commercial Vehicles
Children can be seriously injured in collisions involving transport trucks, delivery vehicles, dump trucks, construction vehicles, buses, and other commercial vehicles. These cases can involve pedestrian injuries, bicycle injuries, passenger injuries, brain injuries, spinal injuries, fractures, amputations, and catastrophic impairment.
Truck and commercial vehicle claims often require early investigation. Driver conduct, speed, visibility, blind spots, vehicle size, stopping distance, route planning, maintenance records, dashcam footage, company policies, driver logs, inspection records, and insurance coverage can all become important.
When children are injured by a truck or commercial vehicle, the case should not be treated like a simple car accident. The size of the vehicle, the location of the collision, the driver’s training, the company’s safety practices, and the presence of children near schools, crosswalks, residential streets, driveways, parking lots, or construction areas can all affect the liability analysis.
Dog Bite and Dog Attack Injuries Involving Children
Children often suffer serious physical and psychological injuries from dog bites and dog attacks. These injuries can include facial scarring, nerve damage, puncture wounds, infections, fractures, fear of animals, nightmares, anxiety, and long-term emotional trauma.
In Ontario, dog owner liability is governed by the Dog Owners’ Liability Act. A child’s claim might involve the dog’s owner and, depending on the facts, other parties responsible for the property or the child’s supervision.
Dog bite cases involving children should be documented carefully. Photographs of the injuries, medical records, scarring evidence, witness names, animal control records, prior incidents, ownership information, leash or containment issues, and psychological symptoms can all matter.
We often see dog attacks affect a child long after the wounds heal. Scarring, fear, embarrassment, sleep problems, counselling needs, and future treatment should be considered before any settlement is reached.
Legal Sources for Child Injury Claims in Ontario
Several Ontario rules and statutes are especially important in child injury claims.
Rule 7 of the Rules of Civil Procedure governs litigation involving parties under disability, including minors. Rule 7.01 deals with the need for a litigation guardian. Rule 7.02 sets out affidavit requirements for a litigation guardian. Rule 7.08 deals with court approval of settlements. Rule 7.09 deals with money payable to a person under disability.
The Superior Court of Justice publishes Rule 7 settlement approval guidance. That guidance confirms that settlement approval materials should give the judge enough information to decide whether the proposed settlement is reasonable and in the best interests of the minor plaintiff.
The Limitations Act, 2002 has special provisions for minors. Section 6 addresses the running of limitation periods where a minor is not represented by a litigation guardian. Section 8 deals with discoverability where a litigation guardian represents the claimant in relation to the claim. Section 9 addresses applications or motions by potential defendants to appoint a litigation guardian in certain circumstances.
The Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule has specific catastrophic impairment rules for children injured in motor vehicle accidents, including pediatric traumatic brain injury criteria and developmental-implications language for some impairments where the insured person was under 18 at the time of the accident.
Ontario’s Minors’ Funds Program explains how money paid into court for a child can be held and managed.
Speak With an Ontario Child Injury Lawyer
If your child was seriously injured, early decisions can affect the claim. Evidence preservation, limitation periods, notice requirements, accident benefits, school records, expert assessments, Rule 7 settlement approval, catastrophic impairment assessment, and protection of settlement funds all need to be handled properly.
Foster Injury Law's Ontario injury lawyers can represent injured children and their families across Ontario.
Contact Foster Injury Law for a free consultation about your child’s injury claim.