2 total
Summary judgment Motion granted
A status review application under the Child and Family Services Act concerning a child who had been in the care of the Children's Aid Society.
The society sought a Crown wardship order with no access, while the respondent mother sought the return of the child to her care.
The court determined that a further order was necessary to protect the child and that the society had met its onus on a summary judgment motion to demonstrate there was no genuine issue for trial.
The court found that the mother had failed to address the risks to the child, had not consistently engaged with counselling services despite court orders, and had demonstrated significant ambivalence toward parenting through inconsistent access patterns.
The court granted the Crown wardship order with no access, finding that the mother had not satisfied the statutory test for access to a Crown ward.
Children made Crown wards on summary judgment with sibling access and no parental access.
In a child protection proceeding under the Child and Family Services Act, the Children’s Aid Society sought summary judgment making three children Crown wards without parental access.
The court considered Rule 16 of the Family Law Rules governing summary judgment and the statutory requirements for access to Crown wards under s. 59(2.1) of the Act.
Evidence demonstrated a long history of child protection involvement, sexual abuse by the father resulting in incarceration, and expert assessments indicating the mother lacked capacity to meet the children’s needs.
The court found no genuine issue requiring a trial and concluded that parental access would impair the children’s prospects for adoption.
Summary judgment was granted making the children Crown wards with sibling access but without parental access.
