Criminal Code of Canada (Bilingual - English and French)
Note: No specific HIV-related laws. Prosecution can be under:
The Supreme Court of Canada (R. v. Cuerrier,  2 SCR 371) ruled that there is a legal duty to disclose HIV-positive status to sexual partners before having sex that poses a "significant risk" of HIV transmission. Non-disclosure viatiates consent constituting fraud.
However, “significant risk” has not been clearly or consistently defined and prosecutions for non-disclosure prior to oral sex and sex with condoms have taken place.
Additionally, a futher ruling by the Supreme Court of Canada (R. v. Williams,  2 SCR 134) suggested that a person may have a legal duty to disclose their HIV-positive status before having sex that poses a significant risk of transmission even if they know their sexual partner also has HIV; and a person who knows there is a risk that he or she has HIV (but has not received an actual HIV-positive diagnosis) may have a legal duty to tell sexual partners about this risk before having unprotected sex.
As a result, substantial confusion amongst people living with HIV, healthcare workers and legal practitioners exists regarding when the duty to disclose arises. (See Mykhalovskiy E. The problem of "significant risk": Exploring the public health impact of criminalizing HIV non-disclosure. Social Science & Medicine (2011) (In further reading)
In February 2012, the Supreme Court of Canada revisited the above rulings during two appeals (R v. Mabior; R v 'DC') in order to re-examine whether Cuerrier remains valid in the light of inconsistent lower court decisions regarding what constitutes a "significant risk" of HIV transmission in the context of sex, especially when the person with HIV wears a condom and/or has an undetectable viral load due to effective antiretroviral therapy. A decision is expected by Autumn 2012.
Below are Factums (statements of the facts of a case) from the Manitoba Prosecution Service - arguging that all potential sexual exposure, regardless of condom use or viral load should require disclosure - and from the interveners: Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network, HIV & AIDS Legal Clinic (Ontario), Coalition des organismes communautaires québécois de lutte contre le sida, Positive Living Society of British Columbia, Canadian AIDS Society, Toronto People With AIDS Foundation, Black Coalition for AIDS Prevention and Canadian Aboriginal AIDS Network - arguing that advances in science now require the Court to rule more clearly on what constitutes "significant risk" and to agree that there is no requirement to disclose if a condom is used or the person with HIV has an undetectable viral load.
A short audio report following the appeal hearing from Xtra Magazine's Marcus McCann can be heard below.
Canada was the first country to prosecute mother-to-child transmission (in 2006) and the first to try someone for murder as a result of sexual HIV transmission without disclosure (in 2009). For further details see: Canada in HIV and the Criminal Law (NAM, 2010)
According to Data provided by the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network where outcomes are known there have been 13 acquittals and 6 cases where charges were dropped.
The majority of the 146 cases accused men, with 16 cases accusing women (14 women in total have been charged – one has been charged 3 times).
Given that there are an estimated 48,100 people living with (diagnosed) HIV in Canada (Source: Public Health Agency of Canada) this places Canada as one of the top ten countries in the world for arrests/prosecutions per capita of PLHIV (3.03 per 1000).
In Ontario, a campaign for prosecutorial guidelines was launched in September 2010 with some commitment in March 2011 from Ontario's Attorney General to draft such guidance. The process has been delayed due to the recent Supreme Court of Canada appeals, and two appeals due to be heard at the Ontario Court of Appeal in June 2012. A similar process is ongoing in Quebec.
Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network. HIV/AIDS Policy and Law Review (all editions, 1995-2012)
Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network. Criminal Law and HIV/AIDS: Final Report (1996)
Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network. After Cuerrier: Canadian Criminal Law and the Non-Disclosure of HIV-Positive Status. (1999)
Search Canada on Criminal HIV Transmission.
Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network (National)
HIV AIDS Legal Clinic - Ontario (HALCO) (http://www.halco.org/)
Pivot Legal Society (BC)
AIDS Committee of Toronto (Ontario)
Ontario HIV Trials Network
Ontario Working Group on Criminal Law and HIV Exposure (CLHE)
A complete library of documents relating to HIV and the criminal law in Canada can be found online at the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network.
There are specific regulations for people with HIV/AIDS intending to enter Canada.
Foreigners intending to stay in Canada for more than 6 months have to undergo a medical examination. Since January 2002, the testing for HIV is one of the mandatory examinations. Due to the new regulations, the majority of foreigners testing positive for HIV won't be granted a residence permit for Canada. There are exceptions for the following groups of people:
June 2005 effective changes to visitor visa process affecting entry into Canada for people living with HIV/AIDS:
For updated information, please go to: www.hivrestrictions.org
Male to Male relationships: Legal
Female to Female Relationships: Legal
Age of consent: Different for heterosexuals and homosexuals
Marriage and Substitutes for Marriage: Recognized on national level
For updated information, please go to: http://ilga.org