2 total
The court dismissed a child protection agency's application for Crown wardship, returning the child to the mother under a supervision order due to sufficient community supports mitigating her cognitive limitations.
A status review application under the Child and Family Services Act concerning a child apprehended due to inadequate parental care and weight loss.
The child's mother sought return of the child to her care under supervision, while the Children's Aid Society sought a Crown wardship order without access.
The court found that despite the mother's cognitive limitations, the substantial supports now in place—including counselling, parenting enhancement services, and community support—were sufficient to mitigate the original risk factors.
The court ordered the child returned to the mother's care under a 12-month supervision order with specific conditions.
The court denied a mother's request to relocate with her child, prioritizing the child's established educational supports and access to his father.
A motion concerning the relocation of a child from Toronto to London, Ontario.
The respondent mother sought permission to relocate with the child to accept a lateral employment transfer.
The applicant father opposed the relocation, arguing it would negatively impact the child's relationship with him and his educational progress.
The court considered the best interests of the child under the Children's Law Reform Act and the principles established in Gordon v. Goertz, ultimately denying the relocation request and finding that the child's interests were better served by remaining in Toronto with continued access to both parents.
