MH v. Children’s Aid Society of Toronto, 2021 CFSRB 9

CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES REVIEW BOARD

BETWEEN:

MH Applicant

-and-

Children’s Aid Society of Toronto Respondent

-and-

Tungasuvvingat Inuit Added Party

DECISION

Adjudicators: Gabrielle Pop-Lazic, Tamara Jordan, Daniel McSweeney Date: February 22, 2021 Citation: 2021 CFSRB 9 Indexed As: MH v Children’s Aid Society of Toronto (CYFSA s.192)

INTRODUCTION

1This is an Application filed with the Child and Family Services Review Board (“CFSRB”) under section 192 of the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017, SO 2017, c.14, Sched.1 (the “Act”).

BACKGROUND

2The Applicant lives in British Columbia. She wishes to adopt a child, BG (the “Child”), who lives in Toronto. The Applicant has a kin relationship with the Child.

3The Respondent sent the Applicant a letter, dated November 4, 2020, refusing the Application for adoption.

4The Application moved through the pre-hearing and mediation stages and was scheduled for a hearing on February 22 and 25, 2021.

5On February 19, 2021, the Panel received a letter from the Respondent confirming that it had rescinded its refusal of the Applicant’s adoption application for the Child. The Respondent is proceeding with the placement of the Child with the Applicant and in the process of confirming which service provider will provide the required post-placement services. As such, the Respondent requested that the hearing dates be vacated.

6In an earlier e-mail the Respondent indicated that the Applicant sought to adjourn the Application to address the Child’s transition plan, and for the Respondent to confirm post-placement services in writing with a service provider in British Columbia. The Applicant also sought the CFSRB’s assistance in case managing the adoption process.

7The hearing proceeded on February 22, 2021 during which the Applicant and Respondent were asked to provide submissions on the CFSRB’s jurisdiction in regard to the Application.

8This decision was rendered orally at the hearing and has been edited for grammar and to provide additional context.

THE LAW

9Section 192 (1)(a) of the Act applies to a society’s decision to refuse an application to adopt a particular child by a foster parent or other person.

10Section 192 (11) of the Act outlines the CFSRB’s jurisdiction in relation to an adoption refusal. The CFSRB can only confirm or rescind a society’s decision and give written reasons for its decision.

ANALYSIS

11The Panel considered the CFSFRB’s jurisdiction to review an Application where a society has approved an adoption plan. In addition, the Panel considered the Applicant’s request that the CFSRB play a case management role in relation to the adoption process.

12At the hearing, the Applicant’s Counsel submitted that the CFSRB had jurisdiction to remain involved in the adoption process in a case management capacity. In support of this argument, the Applicant’s Counsel cited section 339(3)(9) of the Act. Counsel wanted to ensure that the adoption arrangements continued without delay and that the adoption would be completed. A further delay would not be in the best interests of the Child.

13The Respondent’s Counsel submitted that the CFSRB did not have jurisdiction to address any aspect of the adoption once the adoption was approved based on section 192 of the Act which gives it the authority to confirm or rescind the Respondent’s decision. In addition, Counsel argued that the Board’s case management role was limited to the preparation and execution of the hearing, and not to resolving issues between an applicant and respondent. In addition, section 339 dealt with the Minister’s powers to make regulations for the purposes of the Act, including case management relating to the residential placement of children (i.e., not adoption).

14After considering the submissions of both parties, the Panel determined that it did not have jurisdiction to proceed in the matter. Its jurisdiction is derived from section 192(11) of the Act which directs it to confirm or rescind a society’s decision to refuse an adoption application.

15The CFSRB’s case management jurisdiction is only engaged where the application has been found to be eligible insofar as it falls within the CFSRB’s jurisdiction to hear the matter under the Act.

16As such, the Application is dismissed without prejudice to the Applicant who may reapply in the event that the Respondent refuses the Application to adopt or refuses to proceed with the adoption.

17The Panel is cognizant of the significant delays in this matter and the Applicant’s concerns regarding any further delay. If the adoption application is refused in the future, the CFSRB is committed to proceeding expeditiously based on the timelines in the CFSRB’s Rules of Procedure Part IV and Ontario Regulation 155/18, section 104. The Panel is also cognizant that adoption proceedings are party driven, and it looks to parties to ensure that proceedings move along as expeditiously as possible, and in the best interests of the child.

ORDER

18The Application is dismissed.

CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER

19Pursuant to Rules 9.3 and 9.4 of the CFSRB’s Rules of Procedure, parties and their representatives must not use, share, discuss or disclose any CFSRB documents or decisions or any other documents or information provided or used in this Application with anyone, including through the media or online. The CFSRB prohibits the use of any of this information for any purpose outside of the CFSRB’s proceedings, except with an order of the Court or the CFSRB, as appropriate.