Elaine Deluzio

The Children's Aid Society sought Crown wardship with no access for two children based on parental drug use and alleged protection concerns.

The court found that while both parents struggle with long-standing drug addictions, the Society's apprehension of the children was not justified on the evidence presented.

The court determined that the children should be returned to parental care pursuant to a supervision order with a reintegration plan, finding that the parents' drug addictions, while a legitimate concern, did not preclude their ability to parent with appropriate support and monitoring.

The court was critical of the Society's restrictive approach to access and lack of support for the parents' rehabilitation efforts.

This is a costs decision in a child protection matter where the respondent father sought costs against the Hastings Children's Aid Society following a 14-day trial.

The Society had brought a protection application alleging the children were at risk of sexual and emotional harm from the father.

The court found the father had not posed a risk of sexual harm and dismissed the Society's application on that ground.

Only the older child was found to be at risk of emotional harm, unrelated to the father's actions.

The court awarded costs of $50,000 against the Society, finding it had failed to conduct a thorough investigation, relied almost exclusively on the mother's allegations, and failed to meet its ongoing obligation to investigate and present all relevant facts to the court.