Dr. Sinclair

The respondent father brought a motion for compliance with a consent temporary parenting time order dated April 12, 2024, and sought make-up parenting time for time that was withheld.

The applicant mother countered with a motion to vary the parenting time order and impose supervised parenting time.

The central issue involved allegations of family violence and coercive control by the father.

Following a high-risk committee meeting on March 12, 2025, the mother withheld the child and supervised parenting time was implemented.

The Children's Aid Society initially required supervision but subsequently changed its position and stated it was not taking a position on parenting time.

The court found that while the father had engaged in reprehensible conduct in the past, his recent behavior demonstrated a shift, he had cooperated with authorities, undertaken counselling and programming, and there was no evidence of continued violations of court orders.

The court dismissed the mother's motion for supervised parenting time, ordered the mother to comply with the April 12, 2024 order, and denied the father's request for make-up time.

Jehovah's Witness parents challenged Ontario child protection legislation after their premature infant was made a temporary ward of a children's aid society so that doctors could administer a blood transfusion deemed medically necessary.

The appeal raised whether the statutory scheme infringed parental liberty under s. 7 and freedom of religion under s. 2(a) of the Charter.

A majority held that any s. 7 deprivation was either not established or was in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice, and that the infringement of freedom of religion was justified under s. 1 in light of the pressing objective of protecting children at risk.

The Court also dismissed the cross-appeal concerning the unusual costs award made against the Attorney General of Ontario.