The applicant society brought a summary judgment motion within a status review application seeking a finding that three young children remained in need of protection and requesting Crown wardship without access.
The father consented to the requested relief and did not participate further in the proceedings, while the self‑represented mother filed no responding materials and failed to attend the motion.
Evidence established serious concerns including neglect, hazardous home conditions, unexplained physical injuries to a child, missed medical appointments, and the parents’ persistent failure to attend visits or engage with services.
The court held that there was no genuine issue requiring a trial under Rule 16 of the Family Law Rules and that the children required stability and permanency.
Summary judgment was granted declaring the children in need of protection, ordering Crown wardship, and denying parental access.
