Legal Risks for Hosts When Guests Drink and Drive in Canada

Sara Santos-Vigneault
Dec 15, 2025
4 min read

Written by: Sara Santos-Vigneault

Date: December 15, 2025

Family enjoying festive dinner with sparklers, surrounded by candles and warm lights against a cozy brick wall and Christmas tree backdrop. — Photo by Nicole Michalou

Private holiday parties often include alcohol, guests staying late, and travel home in winter conditions. These situations raise important legal questions about whether the host could be responsible if someone gets hurt after leaving. Canadian courts refer to this as social host liability. While the law does not generally hold private hosts responsible, recent cases show that legal risk may arise when certain facts are present.

What Is Social Host Liability?

Social host liability is a legal concept that applies when a person hosts a private event and a guest harms someone after consuming alcohol at that event. The harm is usually caused by impaired driving, but other forms of injury may be considered.

The injured person may sue the host for negligence.

To succeed in a negligence claim, the injured person must prove that:

The host owed them a duty of care,
The host breached that duty,
The breach caused their injury, and
They suffered compensable damages.

Canadian courts assess whether the duty of care existed based on three factors: foreseeability, proximity, and broader policy concerns.

The Supreme Court's Position in Childs v. Desormeaux

In Childs v. Desormeaux, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that social hosts do not automatically owe a duty of care to people harmed by their guests [1]. The case involved a New Year’s Eve party where a guest consumed alcohol, drove away, and caused a fatal car crash. The hosts did not serve the alcohol—it was a BYOB (bring your own bottle) event.

The Court found that:

There was no foreseeable risk that the hosts should have known the guest would drive while impaired.
There was no proximity, because the hosts did not control the guest’s actions or alcohol consumption.
Recognizing a duty could lead to policy concerns, such as placing an unreasonable burden on people who host private events.

The decision established that private hosts are generally not liable when guests harm others after leaving their event—unless additional factors are present.

People in festive attire cheer with drinks, surrounded by colorful balloons and confetti, creating a joyful party atmosphere. — Photo by The OurWhisky Foundation 🥃

When the Facts Differ: Williams v. Richard

In Williams v. Richard, the Ontario Court of Appeal allowed a claim against a social host to proceed to trial [2]. In that case, the host provided beer to a guest who consumed approximately 15 drinks over three hours. The host knew the guest would be driving children home and tried to intervene, but the guest left anyway and was involved in a serious crash.

The Court emphasized that factual details matter. Unlike Childs, the host in Williams supplied the alcohol, knew the guest was intoxicated, and knew the guest was responsible for others while driving. These facts were enough to justify a full trial to decide whether a duty of care existed.

This decision shows that in certain cases, especially where hosts are more actively involved, liability may be considered.

Why the Holiday Season Matters

Holiday gatherings may increase the legal risk for social hosts. Some common seasonal factors include:

Winter driving conditions, such as ice and snow, which make impaired driving more dangerous.
Late-night departures, when fatigue adds to the risk of harm.
Guests driving children, which increases potential consequences.
Greater alcohol consumption, often associated with year-end celebrations.

While the law does not impose a general duty on hosts to monitor guests, courts may consider whether a host was aware of these risk factors and failed to take reasonable steps.

How Courts Evaluate Host Responsibility

Courts examine whether the harm was foreseeable based on the situation. For example, if a host knew a guest was intoxicated and planned to drive with children in the car, that could support foreseeability. The court also considers proximity—whether the host’s involvement in the event was close enough to create responsibility.

In Williams, the host’s role in supplying alcohol and being aware of the risk was critical. In Childs, the hosts had less involvement, and no duty of care was found.

There is no clear formula. Each case depends on specific facts.

What Hosts Commonly Do in High-Risk Situations

While not legally required, some hosts take steps to reduce the risk of harm, such as:

Encouraging taxis or rideshare use for guests who have been drinking,
Organizing a sober driver for groups of guests,
Offering overnight accommodations, especially during winter weather,
Avoiding service of alcohol to guests who appear visibly impaired,
Checking in with guests before they leave, particularly when children are in the vehicle,
Supervising underage guests and preventing access to alcohol or cannabis.

Courts may view these actions as signs that the host acted responsibly, even if something goes wrong. However, these actions are not legal obligations unless a specific duty of care is established in court.

What Remains Unsettled in Canadian Law

Several questions about social host liability remain unanswered:

Cannabis use is increasingly common, but few cases have addressed whether it changes the analysis.
Employer-sponsored events may raise different legal issues, including workplace and occupational safety law.
Cases involving minors may impose higher expectations on adult hosts.
Different provinces may interpret similar facts in different ways.

The law continues to evolve. As Canadian courts hear new cases, the boundaries of social host liability will become clearer.

Conclusion

Canadian law does not make private party hosts automatically responsible when a guest causes harm after leaving. However,:

when the host serves alcohol, is aware of impairment, and knows a guest intends to drive—especially during the holidays or in winter conditions—the courts may consider whether the host had a duty to act.

Recent case law shows that facts matter. Legal risk may arise depending on the host’s level of involvement and awareness of danger.