The criminal code explicitly cites common law as the source and supplementary crminial law ( art 1, 2 or 3 I can't remember.)
So in Canada the main charge has what called lesser and included charges. So first degree murder incliuded second, aggravated assault, etc tec.
So soyboyz faces the lesser and included charges with whatever the cops decide to charge him with.
If you go to justice.gouv.gc.ca you can get the e version of the latest criminal code and peruse the relevant chapter

BUT the BEST part is that he can be taken to the Human rights tribunal for CHARTER violations as well as the Ontario human rights law. So he's looking at exemplary damges as well as laxer standard of proof. The Ontario rules of practice are guidelines.
TLDR; he could be homeless as well as in jail by next year.
xavier

Assault, battery, etc, are all codified now, and this was in Toronto so im not familiar with Canadian law, or provincial law.

Under the English common law, and in almost all states in the US, "Mr." Hunt's acts are most definitely assault and battery. Assault is taking action that a reasonable person would conclude that a battery upon him is about to take place. Battery is an unwanted, offensive or harmful touching.

"Mr." Hunt's stance, effeminate as it is, coupled with the confrontation, is an assault. His roundhouse kick to the phone is a battery. His intent to kick the phone is irrelevant. If he had made contact only with the phone, it's still a battery.

The battery extends to "personal space" and the phone is in her space, so if he hits the thing you're holding, it's still a battery. If "Mr." Hunt had snatched the phone out of the woman's hand, that's battery. If he had hit the phone with his hand, that's a battery. If he had stood in her space and spit on her, that's battery. if he had stood in her space and intentionally touched her in any way, even if that touch caused no physical harm at all, it's battery.