3 total
Summary judgment Case allowed
This is a child protection proceeding under the Child, Youth and Family Services Act (CYFSA) concerning maternal access to a three-year-old child (Amelia) who was found to be in need of protection and made a crown ward (now extended society care).
The trial addressed only the issue of maternal access following a prior summary judgment motion that established the child's need for protection.
The mother sought continued access to the child, but the court found that the mother failed to meet the best interests test, particularly in demonstrating that the relationship was beneficial and meaningful to the child.
The court terminated all access.
Sole custody was awarded to the mother after the court found the father engaged in a pattern of controlling and abusive behavior.
A custody dispute between two parents following their separation in April 2013.
The applicant sought custody of two biological children, while the respondent sought custody of all four children (including two older children from her previous relationship).
The court found that the applicant had engaged in a pattern of controlling, abusive, and physically violent behavior toward the respondent and the children, including grabbing them by the throat and neck.
The respondent was awarded sole custody of both children, with the applicant granted bi-weekly access.
The court rejected the clinical investigator's recommendation for shared care, finding that such an arrangement would perpetuate the struggle for control and be contrary to the children's best interests.
Summary judgment for Crown wardship without access was granted due to the parents' unresolved substance abuse and domestic violence issues.
The Children's Aid Society brought a motion for summary judgment seeking an order for Crown wardship without access to a child in need of protection.
The respondent parents opposed the motion and requested that the matter proceed to trial.
The court found that the parents had unresolved issues including substance abuse, domestic violence, and parenting inadequacy.
The child had been in care for over 400 days and was thriving with foster parents.
The court granted the motion for Crown wardship without access, finding that no genuine or material issues remained to be resolved at trial and that the child's best interests required immediate placement for adoption with the foster parents.
