The applicant, a maternal grandmother, brought a motion seeking interim access to her grandchildren, mandatory disclosure of their medical and educational information, and the appointment of the Office of the Children's Lawyer.
The children's parents (respondents) opposed the motion, characterizing the grandmother's past relationship with the children as toxic.
Applying the newly amended "best interests of the child" definition under section 24 of the Children's Law Reform Act, the court dismissed the applicant's motion.
The court found that forcing contact was not in the children's best interests at that time, citing the high level of conflict between the parties, the applicant's mixed motivations, the unified opposition from the extended family, allegations of family violence, and the children's expressed views.
The decision emphasized the deference owed to parental decisions regarding child contact unless overriding them is clearly required by the child's best interests.
