MONTREAL -- The Quebec Court of Appeal has restored a criminal harassment conviction against a man, saying his ex-partner's concerns for her psychological or emotional well-being are enough to convict.

In a decision rendered Wednesday, the court ruled there was no requirement that the woman fear for her physical safety or for the accused to have taken violent action against her. It set aside the man's acquittal and sent the case back to a judge to determine his sentence.

When the complainant ended their relationship in the summer of 2013, the man didn't accept the break-up well, according to the facts in the case.

Shortly after, the woman received a letter portraying her as a seductress who dates and manipulates several men at the same time. She then started to receive anonymous calls. 

When she had a friend over to her home one evening, her ex-partner called her to tell her that he knew about the visitor. That night, there was a knock on her window. 

The next day, the man called her several times, and when she didn't answer, he showed up at her house. In the following days, the suspicious calls continued. 

In late September, the complainant found a letter on the windshield of her car accusing her of being a liar and a manipulator. The man threatened to send the first letter she'd received to other people, revealing her so-called "secret manipulations."

He also instructed her to place a yellow envelope on her car's dashboard and await future instructions if she wanted the letters to stop.

The woman then made a police complaint. The anonymous messages continued, and she recognized her ex's voice.

She received insulting letters, some of a sexual nature, with her photos in them, and copies of more than one Facebook conversation.

Following an investigation, police arrested the man, who was accused of criminal harassment and harassing communications.

The calls and letters stopped, though the man denied he was behind them.

Dismissing his testimony entirely, the trial judge found him guilty in 2015 on both counts, but the Superior Court acquitted him of criminal harassment in 2018.

A criminal harassment conviction requires the Crown to demonstrate that the complainant had a "subjective fear" for her safety.

The Superior Court judge ruled that this was not the case for the complainant, determining that her feelings of "worry, anxiety and distress" cannot constitute fear.

The Court of Appeal disagreed.

While a simple worry or feeling of discomfort isn't enough to find someone guilty of criminal harassment, the court ruled, "subjective fear" does not necessarily require that the victim be terrified, nor that the accused made violent gestures or threats.

"The courts have since recognized that the subjective fear of a victim for their safety in matters of criminal harassment extends not only to physical safety, but also to psychological or emotional safety," the decision reads. 

This report by The Canadian Press was first published July 16, 2020.