2 total
The court dismissed the Society's request to place the child with the father, returning the child to the mother under strict supervision.
The Children's Aid Society of Ottawa sought a protection order for the child M., requesting placement with the father under supervision.
The mother sought the child's return to her care with supervision.
The Society's concerns included the mother's volatile behavior, lack of insight, mental health, and attachment issues, exacerbated by the presence of an individual with a history of domestic violence.
The court found that the Society failed to meet its burden of proof to demonstrate that the child could not be adequately protected by an order returning the child to the mother's care with strict supervision.
The court ordered the child to be returned to the mother's care, subject to extensive conditions including cooperation with the Society, participation in various counselling and parenting programs, and restrictions on individuals residing in or providing alternate care for the child.
Adjournment denied where corporate respondent lacked assets and personnel to instruct counsel.
The corporate respondent, which had no employees or assets and whose owner was bankrupt, renewed its request to adjourn the scheduled hearing.
The respondent's counsel argued that he could not obtain instructions because there was no one from the corporation to instruct him, and the insurer could only give instructions regarding settlement, not defence.
The Tribunal denied the adjournment, finding that the lack of an instructing party was not a new circumstance and adjourning the hearing would not resolve the issue.
The Tribunal also noted that the respondent had ample time to seek instructions from the insurer.
