Bill 75 is an omnibus provincial statute that bundles criminal‑justice and public‑safety measures with separate reforms to animal research, coroners’ inquests, police record checks and a public‑safety survivors scholarship fund. Key public‑safety changes rework how surety debts are enforced (moving certain certificates into the land registry and enabling collection tools), create new administrative licence suspensions and vehicle impound powers for suspected dangerous driving, and raise penalties and impound periods for repeat offenders.
The bill also introduces significant animal‑welfare and research controls: it forbids invasive medical research on cats, dogs and other prescribed animals except under narrow, committee‑approved circumstances; it bars supply facilities from breeding cats and dogs for research; and it raises penalties for harming animals that work with peace officers. Other notable measures include a prohibition on recordings at inquests (with limited exceptions), new mandatory service standards for police record check providers (paired with a broad bar on civil remedies for noncompliance), and the statutory continuation and governance rules for the Constable Joe MacDonald scholarship fund.
The package changes operational authorities across multiple ministries and will trigger new regulatory regimes and compliance duties for institutions, private individuals and enforcement agencies.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill moves certain bail‑related certificates of lien into Ontario’s land registry system and gives the Crown and Minister of Finance new collection tools; it authorizes police to administratively seize licences and detain/impound vehicles on reasonable grounds for dangerous operation; it prohibits most invasive medical research on cats, dogs and other prescribed animals unless approved by an animal care committee and carried out under prescribed conditions; and it creates binding service standards for police record checks while limiting civil remedies for failures.
Who It Affects
Research institutions and supply facilities that use or source cats and dogs; accused persons, sureties and landowners whose property may carry registered liens; drivers—particularly commercial drivers—and vehicle owners facing administrative suspensions and impoundments; police services and administrative tribunals that will process appeals; and police record check providers and employers who rely on those checks.
Why It Matters
The bill shifts enforcement tools from process‑based remedies to administrative and property‑based mechanisms (land registration, Ministry of Finance collection powers and immediate administrative suspensions), potentially accelerating enforcement but narrowing procedural remedies. For research and animal welfare, it creates operational constraints that will reshape protocols, approvals and supply chains for institutions that use cats and dogs.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
Schedule 1 overhauls the Animals for Research Act. It prohibits invasive medical research on cats, dogs and other animals the regulations may name, and it generally bars other non‑invasive research on those animals unless a registered research facility follows prescribed procedures and receives written approval from an animal care committee.
The schedule tightens registration requirements for research facilities, requires animal care committees to include at least one veterinarian and to keep written records of proposal reviews, prevents supply facilities from breeding cats or dogs for research, and expands regulatory powers (including the ability to incorporate external standards by reference and to adopt rolling updates). Offences are reclassified into minor and major categories with substantial fines and potential jail terms for major breaches.
Schedule 2 rewrites how certain bail‑related financial obligations are secured and collected. Where a release order under section 515 of the Criminal Code requires a surety to promise payment, the Crown Attorney can register a certificate of lien in the proper land registry office against the specified land for the promised amount.
Those registered liens expire after six years unless a writ of fieri facias is filed and the sheriff takes execution steps. The Minister of Finance may, under memorandum of understanding terms, use specified Ministry of Revenue Act debt‑collection tools to enforce amounts owed to the Crown.
The Schedule also creates a discrete security deposit obligation: if a release order sets out a monetary promise by an accused or a surety, the accused or surety must pay the specified amount in the form, time and manner set out in regulations; failure to do so is an offence. Transitional rules cover legacy certificates previously delivered to sheriffs.Schedule 5 materially strengthens administrative traffic enforcement.
Police who have reasonable and probable grounds to suspect dangerous operation (including causing death) can require immediate surrender of a driver’s licence and detain the vehicle; a 90‑day administrative licence suspension and a seven‑day vehicle impoundment follow specific triggers. The Schedule expands and lengthens impound periods for driving while suspended (14/30/45 day gradations depending on prior impoundments), raises fines for certain offences—especially when committed by commercial motor vehicles—and creates narrow, enumerated grounds to appeal administrative suspensions or impoundments to the Tribunal.
The legislation also enlarges officers’ recordkeeping and notice duties, makes obstruction an offence, and allows impoundment costs to become a lien enforceable under the Repair and Storage Liens Act.Other Schedules: Schedule 3 creates a stand‑alone statute for the Constable Joe MacDonald Public Safety Officers’ Survivors Scholarship Fund, continuing the existing fund, transferring its $5 million initial principal and setting governance and regulatory powers for scholarships. Schedule 4 amends the Coroners Act to require postgraduate training and continuing education for forensic pathologists and to prohibit photographs/recordings at inquests except where the presiding coroner authorizes or limited exceptions apply, making contraventions punishable by fine or jail.
Schedule 6 adds mandatory service standards for police record check providers and simultaneously extinguishes most private‑law causes of action for alleged failures to meet those standards (with limited carve‑outs for judicial review and Crown proceedings), while enabling regulations that set timeframes and reporting obligations. Schedule 7 raises minimum fines for harming animals that work with peace officers and adjusts maximum penalties for related offences against those animals.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The Crown Attorney may register, in the appropriate land registry office, a certificate of lien against land to secure the amount a surety promised in a Criminal Code release order; that lien automatically expires six years after registration unless a writ of fieri facias is filed and the sheriff acts under the Execution Act.
Section 8.0.1 makes it an offence for an accused or a surety to fail to pay a security amount specified in a release order in the time, form and manner set out in regulations—introducing an upfront, regulatory‑defined payment obligation tied to release conditions.
Schedule 1 bans invasive medical research on cats, dogs and prescribed animals except where the research fits narrow regulatory categories and the facility obtains written approval from an animal care committee that includes at least one veterinarian and documents the review.
Under new Highway Traffic Act section 48.5 police who reasonably suspect dangerous operation may demand immediate surrender of a licence (triggering a 90‑day administrative suspension) and detain the vehicle for an administrative seven‑day impound, with limited appeal rights and no pre‑impound hearing.
Police Record Checks Reform Act section 14.1 requires providers to meet prescribed service standards but bars private civil remedies for failures to comply (judicial review and Crown actions remain available), and authorizes regulations requiring providers to report on compliance.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Ban on invasive research and new animal‑care governance
This Schedule creates a categorical prohibition on invasive medical research involving cats, dogs and other animals designated in regulation, and it restricts other research on those animals to projects that satisfy prescribed criteria and pass a written review by an animal care committee. Practically, research facilities must ensure committee membership (including at least one veterinarian), documented proposal reviews, formal transfer procedures for animals, enhanced registration and recordkeeping, and compliance with standards that may be adopted by reference and updated by regulation. Operators of supply facilities cannot breed cats or dogs for research, which will disrupt procurement practices and shift compliance burdens onto both suppliers and research institutions.
Land registry liens, Minister of Finance collection and security deposit rules
The Schedule moves the security mechanism for certain release orders from sheriff‑delivered certificates to registered liens in the land registry, enabling the Crown to realize against real property like a mortgage sale. Registered liens expire after six years unless a writ of fieri facias is filed and execution steps occur. Collection options expand by permitting the Minister of Finance—subject to a memorandum of understanding and regulatory limits—to use specified Ministry of Revenue Act enforcement measures. Separately, the Schedule imposes a regulatory security deposit obligation: where a release order specifies a monetary promise by an accused or surety, the person must make the payment in the manner and time set in regulations, and nonpayment is criminalized. Transitional and expiry rules address legacy certificates previously lodged with sheriffs.
Statutory continuation and governance of the survivors’ scholarship fund
This Schedule converts an Order in Council fund into a standalone statute, transferring the existing principal (including an initial $5 million) to the new fund account and codifying the Minister’s role, application and eligibility rules, and a Minister‑appointed advisory committee. The Committee reviews applications and recommends grants; the Minister retains final discretion but must follow prescribed criteria. Regulations can define eligibility terms, scholarship amounts and transitional matters; the Treasury Board may top up the fund based on forecasted liability and expenditures.
Training mandate for forensic pathologists and a near‑blanket ban on inquest recordings
The Coroners Act changes require the Chief Forensic Pathologist to support postgraduate training and continuing education for pathologists working on coroners’ matters. New section 50.2 broadly prohibits taking, publishing or broadcasting photographs, audio or video recordings at inquests or of persons entering or leaving inquest locations, with narrow exceptions (notes/sketches, limited audio recordings for people with standing or journalists, or coroner‑authorized recordings). Contraventions carry fines up to $25,000 or imprisonment up to six months; coroners gain discretion to authorize records where necessary for evidence or with consent.
Administrative licence suspensions, expanded impound powers and commercial vehicle penalties
This Schedule authorizes police to require surrender of a licence and detain vehicles where there are reasonable and probable grounds a Criminal Code dangerous‑operation offence occurred; surrender triggers an immediate 90‑day administrative suspension for certain dangerous driving allegations and a seven‑day administrative impoundment of the vehicle. It also lengthens and tiers impound periods for driving while suspended (14/30/45 days), substantially increases fines and administrative suspensions for use of display/holding devices in commercial vehicles, and prescribes narrow, enumerated grounds for Tribunal appeals. Costs of removal and impoundment create a lien enforceable under the Repair and Storage Liens Act; police must keep and provide specific notices, and obstruction of officers in this context is a standalone offence.
Mandatory service standards and limits on private remedies
The Act now requires police record check providers to meet prescribed service standards and to report on compliance as regulations require. At the same time, the Schedule extinguishes most private causes of action and remedies (contract, tort, equitable and statutory remedies) arising from alleged failures to meet those service standards—though judicial review, constitutional claims and Crown‑brought proceedings remain available. Regulations may set timeframes for checks and public reporting requirements to facilitate oversight while shielding providers from private litigation tied to operational delays or errors.
Higher minimum penalties for harming law‑enforcement animals
This Schedule separates service animals and animals that work with peace officers and raises the minimum fine for harming animals that work with peace officers to $50,000, with individual maximums up to $260,000 and corporate maximums up to $1,000,000; penalties can include imprisonment. The amendments harmonize cross‑references and adjust the statute’s penalty structure to impose steeper, mandatory minimum financial consequences for those offences.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on this topic across all five countries.
Explore this topic in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Surviving family members of public safety officers — the scholarship fund is statutory, consolidates an initial $5 million, and creates a regulated path to receive tuition and living‑allowance support.
- Law enforcement and public‑safety agencies — new administrative tools (licence surrender, vehicle detention/impoundment and higher penalties for harm to working animals) provide faster, non‑court interventions intended to remove dangerous drivers and protect service animals.
- Animal‑welfare advocates and the public concerned with companion animals — prohibitions on invasive research on cats and dogs and the ban on breeding by supply facilities strengthen protective standards for those animals and raise penalties for harm to law‑enforcement animals.
Who Bears the Cost
- Research institutions and veterinary researchers — they must rework protocols, seek stricter approvals, maintain animal care committees with mandated documentation, and may lose access to certain animals and breeding sources.
- Sureties and landowners — registering liens in the land registry exposes real property to enforcement for surety obligations and creates property‑based risk for owners of encumbered land.
- Vehicle owners and commercial drivers — expanded administrative suspensions, longer impoundments and higher fines (especially for commercial vehicle offences) increase direct monetary costs and the risk of losing access to vehicles with limited pre‑impound procedural recourse.
- Police services and administrative tribunals — the new powers come with recordkeeping, notification and appeal‑processing duties that raise operational workload and may require training and systems changes.
- Police record check providers — they face binding service standards and reporting obligations; although civil exposure is curtailed, compliance and administrative reporting carry resource costs.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is between accelerating public‑safety enforcement and preserving procedural and property protections: the bill privileges faster administrative remedies (registered liens, immediate licence suspensions, vehicle impoundments and restricted civil remedies) to protect communities and animals, but those same mechanisms reduce pre‑deprivation procedural safeguards, shift burdens onto property owners and institutions, and concentrate discretion in executive agencies and police—a trade‑off with significant operational and legal consequences.
The bill assembles measures that trade procedural safeguards for speed and property‑based enforcement. Moving surety certificates into the land registry converts a transactional criminal‑justice instrument into a public encumbrance on land; that change simplifies Crown recovery but raises questions about notice to third‑party purchasers, priority conflicts with existing mortgages, and the interaction with federal criminal law (which sets release conditions).
The six‑year expiry plus the writ‑filing exception creates a firm deadline for Crown collection but may leave unresolved claims where writs are delayed or where the sheriff lacks capacity to take required Execution Act steps.
Administrative suspensions and impoundments are grounded on reasonable and probable grounds rather than conviction, which speeds public‑safety responses but curtails immediate procedural protections (no pre‑impound hearing and limited appellate grounds). The Tribunal appeal routes are tightly circumscribed and decisions are final, raising the prospect of difficult post‑hoc challenges where factual records are incomplete.
Similarly, the abolition of most private causes of action for failures to meet police record check service standards shields providers from litigation but narrows private accountability; oversight becomes heavily dependent on regulatory reporting and government enforcement capacity. Finally, the Animals for Research changes rely heavily on regulatory detail (what qualifies as a veterinary purpose, prescribed criteria for approval, and standards incorporated by reference).
That delegation means practical impact will hinge on forthcoming regulations and the recognized external standards adopted — creating uncertainty for researchers and suppliers during the transitional period.
There's more to this law than the bill.
Codify Laws traces every connection across the legislative lifecycle.