A. Rozario

This is a costs decision in a child protection matter under Part V of the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017.

The Children's Aid Society brought a protection application and subsequently moved for summary judgment, which was denied by the court.

The respondent parents sought costs against the Society, alleging unreasonable and unfair conduct.

The court dismissed the costs requests, finding that while the Society was unsuccessful on the summary judgment motion, the threshold for awarding costs against a child protection agency in such circumstances had not been met.

The court applied the established framework requiring a showing that the Society acted in a patently unfair and indefensible manner, which was not established on the facts.

The Children's Aid Society brought a motion for summary judgment seeking a finding that the child was in need of protection under section 74(2)(h) of the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017 (emotional harm), with no further orders required.

The respondent mother alleged sexual abuse by the father, while the father denied the allegations.

The court denied the summary judgment motion, finding that the Society's evidentiary record was insufficient and contained inadmissible hearsay and opinion evidence.

The court determined that genuine issues requiring a trial existed regarding both the finding of need of protection and the appropriate disposition.