5 total
Motion to keep foster child removed without statutory notice dismissed; child returned to foster parents.
The society brought a motion for an interim order allowing a foster child to reside with the added parties pending the hearing of the foster parents' application to review the society's refusal of their adoption application and proposed removal of the child.
The society had removed the child without providing the statutorily required 10 days' notice and without obtaining a local director's opinion that the child was at risk of harm.
The Board dismissed the society's motion, finding that it was in the child's best interests to remain with the foster parents, who had cared for the child since birth, pending the hearing on the merits.
Child protection appeal dismissed; fresh evidence of alleged ineffective counsel rejected and summary judgment upheld.
The appellant mother appealed a summary judgment order finding her child in need of protection and placing the child in extended society care.
The appellant sought to introduce fresh evidence alleging ineffective assistance of former counsel, claiming she was coerced into signing a Statement of Agreed Facts.
The Divisional Court dismissed the motion to admit fresh evidence, finding it could have been adduced earlier and did not meet the relaxed test for child protection cases.
The court upheld the motions judge's decision to admit the Statement of Agreed Facts and grant summary judgment, finding no genuine issue for trial and no error in principle.
Custody of two children granted to paternal grandparents following mother's failure to protect from sexual abuse.
The Children's Aid Society brought a protection application regarding two children.
The older child disclosed sexual abuse by the mother's new partner, and the mother failed to protect the child, eventually resuming her relationship with the abuser.
The children were placed in the temporary care of their paternal grandparents.
At trial, the court found the children in need of protection.
The father sought custody but had moved to a new city with a partner who had seven children recovering from severe trauma, and the older child refused contact with him.
The court granted a final custody order to the paternal grandparents under section 102 of the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, finding it in the children's best interests, and ordered a structured access schedule for the parents.
Allegation of non-compliance dismissed; society provided adequate reasons for child protection decisions under settlement agreement.
The applicant alleged that the respondent children's aid society failed to comply with a settlement agreement requiring it to provide reasons for its decisions regarding access visits and the placement of her children.
The Child and Family Services Review Board held a compliance hearing and reviewed the society's written responses.
The Board found that the society had provided clear, relevant, and adequate reasons for its decisions, fulfilling its obligations under the agreement and section 120 of the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017.
The allegation of non-compliance was dismissed.
Appeal to be added as a party to child protection proceedings dismissed; best interests not met.
The appellant grandparent appealed a motion judge's decision dismissing his motion to be added as a party to child protection proceedings concerning his grandchild.
The appellant argued the motion judge failed to apply the five-part test for adding parties and failed to give reasons for denying alternative relief for participant status.
The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding the motion judge substantively considered the relevant factors and correctly concluded that adding the appellant was not in the child's best interests, as it would unduly prolong proceedings and the appellant lacked a viable competing plan.
The court also held that the appellant did not meet the statutory precondition of providing continuous care for six months to qualify for participant status.
