Child and Family Services Review Board
Between:
EMM, Applicant
-and-
Durham Children’s Aid Society, Respondent
Decision
Adjudicator: Tracy Foster
Date: July 31, 2025
Citation: 2025 CFSRB 98
Indexed As: EMM v Durham Children’s Aid Society (CYFSA s.120)
Background
1This is an Application filed with the Child and Family Services Review Board (“CFSRB”) pursuant to section 120 of the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017, SO 2017, c.14, Sched.1, (the “Act”).
2This is the third application the Applicant has filed with the CFSRB. The first Application was resolved by way of mediation. The second Application was virtually identical to the first Application apart from a few dates. It was dismissed as abandoned after the Applicant failed to provide submissions on why the Application was not an abuse of the CFSRB process. The current Application involves complaints that were made in the previous two applications.
3The Applicant is the Child’s mother. The Applicant and the Child’s father are involved in an ongoing family court proceeding, to which the Respondent is not a Party.
Issue
4Is the current Application an abuse of the CFSRB process?
Result
5The current Application is an abuse of the CFSRB process, and it must be dismissed.
Analysis
Current Application
6In the current Application, the Applicant complains of issues with how the Respondent handled her file and alleges concerns about the Child’s father’s parenting skills and mental health, and how this affects the Child.
7The CFSRB determined the Application was eligible to proceed under subsections 120(4)4 and 120(4)5 of the Act.
8The Respondent replied that the complaints on the current Application are identical to the Applicant’s two previous Applications and should be dismissed.
9In its Case Management Direction dated July 18, 2025 (“July 18 CMD”), the CFSRB directed the Applicant to provide written submissions by July 24, 2025, on why proceeding with the current Application is not an abuse of the CFSRB process given that the complaints outlined in all three Applications are virtually identical, and a binding settlement was reached on the first Application.
10The July 18 CMD outlined that Rule A8 of the CFSRB’s Rules of Procedure gives the CFSRB the authority to make such orders “in proceedings before it as it considers proper to prevent abuse of its processes.”
The Applicant did not provide submissions to the CFSRB by the required deadline
11As of today’s date, the Applicant has not provided written submissions as directed in the July 18 CMD. I conclude that the Applicant has abandoned her Application. Further, I find that by submitting both the current and second Applications containing identical or similar issues to those previously settled in the first Application by way of mediation is an abuse of the CFSRB process. Thus, the Application must be dismissed.
Order
12The Application is dismissed.
Confidentiality Order
13Pursuant 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 on-line. 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.
Tracy Foster
Tracy Foster
Member