Partner Risk Disclosure and Safety Act

Summary#

This bill aims to prevent gender‑based and domestic violence in Nova Scotia. It creates a “Clare’s Law” process so people can ask police if an intimate partner has a history of violence, expands what counts as domestic and family violence, and requires training for judges and officials. Most parts take effect January 1, 2027.

• Lets people apply to police for information about a current or former partner who may be dangerous. Police can also warn a person at risk even if they did not apply.
• Expands the legal meaning of domestic and family violence to include coercive control, digital abuse, financial and psychological abuse, reproductive coercion, and threats or harm to pets or property.
• Clarifies that domestic violence can be found even if no criminal charge was laid or proven.
• Requires training for justices of the peace and judges on sexual assault law, intimate partner violence, coercive control, trauma‑informed practices, emergency protection orders, and social context (like systemic racism and discrimination).
• Allows the Justice Minister and police to collect and share certain personal and health information to assess risk and prepare “threat assessments,” with rules to safeguard how that information is used.
• Sets up training so police and government staff use a trauma‑informed approach and give referrals to supports.

What it means for you#

• Individuals worried about a partner

  • You can ask police if your current or former partner has a violent past or poses a risk to you or your child.
  • Police may reach out to warn you even if you do not apply.
  • If you receive information, you will also be offered referrals to supports and help with safety planning.
  • Your name and identity are kept private. The fact you asked (or did not ask) cannot be used against you in family court or child protection cases.

• Survivors of abuse

  • More behaviours now count as domestic violence, including controlling or isolating behaviour (coercive control), digital harassment or stalking, financial and psychological abuse, and reproductive coercion (interfering with birth control or pregnancy choices).
  • Threats or harm to pets and damage to property are recognized.
  • These changes can make it easier to get emergency protection orders.

• Parents and children

  • “Family violence” now clearly includes when a child sees or hears violence at home, even if not directly harmed.
  • Family courts will consider a wider range of abusive behaviours in custody and support decisions.

• Police and public officials

  • Must follow a Disclosure Protocol that sets conditions for sharing and safeguarding information.
  • Will receive training on trauma‑informed practices and referrals to services.

• Privacy and information

  • To assess risk, the Minister and police can collect and share some personal and health information with set limits and safeguards.
  • Information given to you cannot be reused for other purposes unless you consent or the law requires it.
  • The provincial Information and Privacy Commissioner keeps existing oversight powers.

• Judges and justices of the peace

  • Must complete specific courses on intimate partner violence, coercive control, trauma‑informed practices, and emergency protection orders.
  • The Chief Judge must report each year on the training offered and how many judges attended.

• Timing

  • Most measures take effect January 1, 2027.

Expenses#

No publicly available information.

Proponents' View#

• Gives people a way to learn about a partner’s violent past so they can plan for safety before harm happens.
• Updates the law to reflect real‑world abuse, including coercive control, digital abuse, and reproductive coercion.
• Allows police to warn someone in danger even if they have not asked for help, which supporters say can save lives.
• Improves the justice system’s response through mandatory, trauma‑informed training for judges and justices of the peace.
• Protects applicants’ privacy and prevents family courts from using a person’s application for disclosure against them.
• Encourages better coordination between police, courts, and services to support victims.

Opponents' View#

• Raises privacy concerns because the government and police may collect and share personal and health information to assess risk.
• Risk assessments and disclosures could be wrong or incomplete, or reflect bias, which may unfairly affect some groups, including Indigenous, African Nova Scotian, and 2SLGBTQIA+ people.
• Immunity from lawsuits for officials and agencies may reduce accountability if mistakes are made.
• Could be costly and complex to run, requiring new systems and training, and may divert resources from shelters, counseling, and housing supports.
• Sharing risk information might escalate danger if not handled carefully, or give a false sense of safety if no record is found.
• Broad regulation‑making powers give the government room to expand or change the program later with limited public debate.