Evan Chan

This is a costs decision arising from a summary judgment motion in a child protection proceeding.

The Children's Aid Society sought Crown wardship with no access for three children.

The Office of the Children's Lawyer opposed the motion, arguing there were triable issues regarding access.

The court granted the society's motion for Crown wardship without parental access but with sibling access.

Foster parents subsequently sought costs against the Office of the Children's Lawyer on a full recovery basis.

The court dismissed the costs request, finding that the Office of the Children's Lawyer properly represented their child client's views and preferences and that no exceptional circumstances warranted a costs award against a government agency in this child protection proceeding.

The accused applied for disclosure of third-party records held by a shelter and Children's Aid Services.

The court addressed two main issues: (1) disclosure of Children's Aid records, which was resolved by consent of all parties; and (2) disclosure of counselling records from the Yellow Brick House shelter.

The court applied the O'Connor test and considered solicitor-client privilege.

The court rejected the defence argument that the "innocence at stake" exception to solicitor-client privilege applied, finding that speculation about potential contradictory statements was insufficient to overcome the stringent test.

The court ordered partial disclosure of specific portions of the shelter records relating to the mother while protecting the child's privacy and privileged communications.