Jason Farrer

The Applicant sought an order extending the deadline to apply for an openness order under s. 196(1) of the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017, relying on the court's parens patriae jurisdiction.

The motion was brought due to a procedural error where the application was served but not issued within the statutory 30-day limit.

The Children's Aid Society consented, while the Office of the Children's Lawyer did not oppose the exercise of parens patriae but required the legal test to be met.

The court dismissed the motion, finding no unintentional legislative gap in the Act and concluding that exercising parens patriae jurisdiction was not necessary to protect the child's best interests, as the child had already filed their own timely openness application.

The Children's Aid Society of the Niagara Region brought a motion for summary judgment to place two children, A. (5 years old) and H. (17 months old), in extended society care for adoption without parental access.

The Society cited parental instability, substance misuse, and lack of engagement.

The mother (M.B.) and father (D.J.) opposed, arguing for a trial and asserting the Society had not provided adequate support.

The court found the children were in continued need of protection and ordered extended society care for both, noting that statutory timelines for interim care had been exceeded.

However, the court found genuine issues for trial regarding access for M.B. and D.J., as the Society failed to provide sufficient evidence that access would impair adoption opportunities or was not in the children's best interests.

Access for J.S.J.M. (H.'s father) was denied due to complete lack of involvement.

The applicant mother filed a complaint with the Child and Family Services Review Board regarding the respondent agency's apprehension of her child and subsequent actions.

The respondent argued the Board lacked jurisdiction because the issues were before the court in a child protection proceeding.

The Board found it lacked jurisdiction over several issues as they were before the court, and dismissed the remaining issues on the basis that the applicant had been heard and provided with written reasons by the respondent.

The children's aid society brought a status review application regarding a young child who had been placed in the temporary care of the maternal grandmother after the parents were found to have physically abused the child's half-sibling.

At trial, the society and the parents sought the return of the child to the parents' care subject to supervision, while the maternal grandmother sought custody.

The court found that the parents had made significant rehabilitative efforts and demonstrated appropriate parenting, whereas the maternal grandmother exhibited hypervigilance that risked alienating the child from the parents.

The court ordered the child returned to the parents subject to a six-month supervision order, finding it to be in the child's best interests.

The applicant filed an application with the Child and Family Services Review Board, which was placed on hold pending ongoing court proceedings.

Despite multiple Case Management Directions requesting details about the nature and stage of the court proceedings to determine if the Board had jurisdiction under the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, the applicant failed to provide the required information.

The adjudicator concluded the applicant had effectively abandoned the application and dismissed it.

The Children's Aid Society brought a motion for summary judgment to dismiss the Mother's status review application, which sought to terminate the Crown ward status of her child, TAK, and return TAK to her custody.

The court reviewed the evidence, including expert reports on TAK's trauma and consistent views against returning to the Mother.

Applying the summary judgment principles and the child's best interests under the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, the court found no genuine issue requiring a trial.

The motion was granted, dismissing the Mother's application, emphasizing the child's need for permanency and stability.