D. Swartz

The applicant Society brought a motion for summary judgment seeking an order that the child, who was born with drug withdrawal symptoms, continues to be in need of protection and should be placed in extended Society care.

The respondent parents, who struggled with ongoing substance abuse and failed to attend access visits, did not file responding materials or attend the motion.

The court granted the summary judgment, finding no genuine issue requiring a trial and that it was in the child's best interests to be placed in extended care for the purpose of adoption.

The applicant Society brought a motion for summary judgment seeking an order that the 15-month-old child be made a Crown ward without access.

The mother was noted in default, and the father opposed the motion, seeking the child's return under supervision.

The court found no genuine issue for trial, noting the parents' ongoing substance abuse issues, lack of stable housing, and failure to engage in services.

The court concluded that Crown wardship without access was in the child's best interests and granted the summary judgment.

The respondent brought a motion while having an outstanding costs order of approximately $8,000 from a previous appearance.

The applicant argued that the respondent's failure to pay the costs order should bar his current motion under Rule 1(8) of the Family Law Rules.

The court found that the respondent had the financial means to pay the order but chose not to do so.

Applying the three-step test for non-compliance, the court declined to exercise its discretion to exempt the respondent from sanctions.

The respondent's motion was dismissed without prejudice to his right to return the motion for hearing upon payment of the outstanding costs.