What Happens If a Child Is Hit by a Car in Ontario?
- 2 days ago
- 9 min read
A child hit by a car while walking in Ontario can apply for Accident Benefits regardless of fault. The child can also have a claim against a negligent driver or another responsible party. These cases are handled differently than adult pedestrian claims because children are not judged by adult standards, the driver can bear the onus of disproving negligence, and any settlement for an injured minor needs court approval.
For a parent, the first concern is obviously getting the child medical care. The legal questions come later. Was the driver speeding? Did the driver see the child? Can the insurance company blame the child for running into the road? What happens if the child’s injuries affect school, sports or development?
A child pedestrian claim should not be reduced to a simple allegation that the child stepped into traffic. The driver’s speed, attention, sightlines and reaction time all need to be examined. So does the child’s age and ability to understand the danger.
Foster Injury Law’s Ontario pedestrian accident lawyers can represent children and families after serious pedestrian collisions involving fractures, head injuries, neurological injuries and other lasting consequences.
Why Child Pedestrian Accident Claims Are Different
A child pedestrian claim is not just an adult pedestrian claim involving a younger person. Children do not judge traffic the same way adults do. A young child does not reliably estimate speed, stopping distance, visibility or danger. Children can act suddenly, follow another child, chase a ball or step into the road without appreciating how little time a driver has to stop.
The court process is also different. A child cannot personally run an Ontario lawsuit. A parent or another suitable adult usually acts as litigation guardian. If the claim settles before the child turns 18, a judge must approve the settlement before it is binding.
The long-term evidence can also be different. An adult has usually finished school, started work and developed a known level of independence. A child has not. A serious injury can affect education, development, recreation, future work and care needs in ways that only become clearer over time.
Can a Child Be Blamed for Running Into the Road?
An insurance company can argue that the child contributed to the collision. But the child is not judged like an adult pedestrian.
In McEllistrum v. Etches, the Supreme Court of Canada confirmed that a child’s conduct is assessed against the care expected from a child of similar age, intelligence and experience.
This means that a child might be struck after misjudging a vehicle’s speed, following a friend, crossing from between parked cars, chasing a ball or failing to understand how close a vehicle really is. It doesn't matter than an adult would have acted differently. The question is what was reasonable for that child.
For a very young child, there can be a serious issue about whether the child can be found contributorily negligent at all. For an older child, fault can still be considered, but only through the child-specific standard.
The driver’s conduct remains very important. A child’s mistake does not excuse a driver who was speeding, distracted, not watching properly or driving without proper care in an area where children were present or reasonably expected.
Does the Driver Have to Disprove Negligence?
Ontario has an important rule for pedestrians injured by motor vehicles.
Under section 193 of the Highway Traffic Act, where loss or damage is caused by a motor vehicle on a highway, the owner, driver, lessee or operator has the onus of proving that the loss or damage did not arise through negligence or improper conduct. This is called the reverse onus.
In child pedestrian cases, the driver and owner must answer whether reasonable care was taken. The driver is not automatically responsible for the collision, but the burden can be important. The evidence still decides the case. Relevant questions can include:
how far the child was visible before impact;
how fast the vehicle was moving;
whether the driver was distracted;
whether parked vehicles blocked the view;
whether the driver was turning or going straight;
lighting, weather and road conditions;
whether the driver braked or swerved; and
whether the collision happened near a school, park, crossing or residential area.
The location matters. Section 193 applies where the collision occurred on a “highway” as defined in the Highway Traffic Act. A child struck in a private parking lot or private driveway can still have a negligence claim, but the statutory reverse-onus rule should not be assumed to apply to every private-property collision.
For more detail on pedestrian liability generally, see our article on who is at fault in a pedestrian accident in Ontario.
Can the Insurance Company Blame a Parent?
Sometimes an insurance company tries to shift attention from the driver to the parent. The argument is usually that the parent should have supervised the child more closely.
That argument is not proven just because the child was near a road, crossed without holding an adult’s hand or was momentarily outside a parent’s reach.
The leading case in Canada is Arnold v. Teno. That case involved a four-and-a-half-year-old child who was catastrophically injured after being struck by a vehicle while returning from an ice cream truck. The defendants argued that the child’s mother should bear part of the responsibility. The Supreme Court of Canada rejected that claim against the mother on the facts.
That does not mean a parent can never be found negligent. It means parental fault is not automatic. The insurer must prove, based on the actual circumstances, that the parent failed to meet the applicable standard of care and that this failure contributed to the collision or injury.
Evidence That Can Decide a Child Pedestrian Claim
Evidence can disappear quickly after a child is struck by a vehicle. Video is often the most urgent issue. A collision near a school, house, apartment building, store, parking lot entrance or intersection might have been recorded by security cameras, doorbell cameras, school cameras, traffic cameras or dashcams. Many recordings are erased or overwritten within days.
The scene itself also matters. Vehicle damage, impact location, tire marks, road measurements, sightlines, parked vehicles, warning signs, school-zone markings and crossing infrastructure can help show what the driver could see and whether the collision could have been avoided.
Witnesses can be especially important if the child is too young, too injured or too frightened to explain what happened. Other parents, students, crossing guards, neighbours and nearby drivers may have seen the child or vehicle before impact.
The child’s records matter as well. Photographs, emergency records, specialist reports, rehabilitation notes and school documentation can help show both the injury and the effect on daily life.
In a serious case, the family should not rely only on the police report or assume the insurer will preserve the evidence that helps the child.
What If the Child Was Hit Near a School, Park or Residential Street?
A driver is not automatically negligent just because a child was hit near a school, park or residential street. But those settings do affect what reasonable care required.
If children are visible near a school, playground, recreation centre, residential sidewalk or community crossing area, a driver’s speed, lookout and ability to stop become especially important.
A driver that observes children near the road cannot assume they will behave like careful adults. Children can move suddenly. They can misjudge traffic. They can follow each other without thinking. A careful driver should take visible child-related risks seriously before something happens. The broader setting can help show what the driver should have anticipated.
Can a Child Pedestrian Receive Accident Benefits After Being Hit by a Car?
Yes. Child pedestrians struck by a motor vehicle in Ontario can apply for Statutory Accident Benefits. Fault does not affect the claim, and the child does not need to have been inside a vehicle.
Accident Benefits are separate from the lawsuit against the negligent driver. Subject to the SABS and the applicable insurance coverage, they can fund treatment and rehabilitation needs such as physiotherapy, occupational therapy, psychological treatment, speech-language therapy or attendant care.
There is also an important child-specific rule. Where the injured person was under 18 at the time of the collision, eligible non-catastrophic medical, rehabilitation and attendant care expenses are generally payable until the person’s 28th birthday, subject to the applicable limits and requirements. For an adult, the ordinary duration limit is generally 260 weeks.
If a child sustains catastrophic injuries, that duration limit for medical, rehabilitation and attendant care benefits does not apply.
Ontario’s Accident Benefits rules change beginning July 1, 2026. Where optional benefits could affect a seriously injured child, the applicable policy and the child’s status under that policy need to be reviewed.
Who Brings a Lawsuit for a Child Hit by a Car?
A child cannot personally start or run an Ontario lawsuit. Under Rule 7 of Ontario’s Rules of Civil Procedure, a proceeding involving a minor is ordinarily brought through a litigation guardian. In most child pedestrian cases, a parent acts in that role, although another suitable adult can act where appropriate.
The claim remains the child’s claim. The litigation guardian’s job is to protect the child’s interests and instruct the lawyer on the child’s behalf. This will often involve relying on the advice of an experienced pedestrian accident lawyer.
This role becomes especially important where the injuries are serious. The litigation guardian can be involved in decisions about evidence, experts, rehabilitation, future care and whether a proposed settlement properly protects the child.
Why a Settlement for an Injured Child Requires Court Approval
A parent cannot make a child’s personal injury settlement final simply by accepting an insurer’s offer. Under Rule 7.08 of Ontario’s Rules of Civil Procedure, a settlement of a minor’s claim is not binding unless it is approved by a judge. This applies whether the lawsuit has already started or the claim settles before a court action is issued.
In a child pedestrian claim, a judge reviewing a proposed settlement can consider the medical evidence, ongoing rehabilitation, settlement amount, litigation guardian’s position and lawyer’s opinion about why the resolution is in the child’s interests.
This is especially important where the injury could affect the child for years. A settlement involving a serious fracture, mobility restriction, head injury or neurological injury must be considered with the child’s future in mind.
Are Time Limits Different for a Child Pedestrian Injury Claim?
Yes. Ontario limitation period rules treat injured minors differently from injured adults. Under the Limitations Act, 2002, the ordinary limitation period generally does not run against a minor while the child is not represented by a litigation guardian in relation to the claim. If a litigation guardian represents the child in relation to the claim, the limitation analysis can change.
Important evidence can disappear long before a limitation period becomes the main issue. Video can be lost within days. Witnesses become harder to find. The collision scene can change. Medical, rehabilitation and school evidence should be gathered as the child’s recovery develops.
There can also be other timing issues, including Accident Benefits requirements and possible notice obligations where the facts raise a claim against a municipality or another public authority.
Serious Injuries After a Child Pedestrian Collision
Children struck by vehicles will often suffer serious fractures, orthopedic injuries, head injuries, spinal injuries, psychological injuries and other long-term impairments.
Traumatic brain injuries can affect learning, memory, behaviour or emotional regulation. A serious lower-limb fracture can affect growth, gait, sports and future treatment. An injury that interferes with school attendance or classroom function can have consequences that are not captured in the first emergency-room records.
Ontario has specific catastrophic impairment rules for severe pediatric traumatic brain injury. Those rules become important in serious cases. But not every child pedestrian claim turns on catastrophic impairment.
Frequently Asked Questions About a Child Hit by a Car in Ontario
Can a child make a claim if the child ran into the road?
Yes. A child entering the road does not defeat the claim. The driver’s conduct still needs to be investigated, and any allegation that the child was partly at fault must be assessed according to the standard applicable to a child of similar age, intelligence and experience.
Is the driver automatically at fault if a child pedestrian is struck?
No. Where section 193 of the Highway Traffic Act applies, the driver and owner bear the onus of proving that the injury did not arise through negligence or improper conduct. That is important, but the outcome still depends on the evidence and any contributory negligence arguments properly available in the case.
Can a parent be blamed if a child is hit by a car?
An insurance company could possibly raise the argument, but a parent is not automatically responsible merely because a child was injured while crossing or near a roadway. Parental negligence must be proven on the facts.
Can a child receive Accident Benefits if the family does not own a vehicle?
A child struck while walking can apply for Accident Benefits even if the child was not inside a vehicle. Determining which insurer responds requires review of Ontario’s insurance priority rules and the family’s circumstances.
Does a parent need court approval to settle a child’s claim?
Yes. A settlement of a minor’s personal injury claim is not binding unless it is approved by a judge under Rule 7.08 of Ontario’s Rules of Civil Procedure.
Should a family wait to see whether the child recovers before contacting a lawyer?
No. The full impact of a child’s injuries can take time to understand, but evidence should be protected early. Video, witness evidence, treatment records and school documentation can all become important.
Speak With an Ontario Pedestrian Accident Lawyer After a Child Is Hit by a Car
A child pedestrian collision can raise difficult questions about driver responsibility, the child’s conduct, attempts to blame a parent, Accident Benefits, preservation of evidence, court procedures and the child’s future needs.
Foster Injury Law is an Ontario personal injury law firm able to represent children and families after serious pedestrian collisions throughout Ontario. If your child was hit by a vehicle and suffered a serious injury, speak with our Ontario pedestrian accident lawyers about the insurance claim, the lawsuit and the steps required to protect your child’s rights.
