4 total
The court granted a motion changing the placement of an Indigenous child to the mother.
This decision concerns a motion to change the placement of a child, A., from her paternal grandmother’s care to her mother’s care under the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017.
The court reviews the admissibility of hearsay evidence, the reliability of statements made by the child, and the comparative risks and benefits of each placement.
The court applies the augmented best interests test for Indigenous children, considering the hierarchy of placements under the federal legislation.
The court concludes that placement with the mother is required to promote A.’s best interests and issues a temporary order accordingly.
Child ordered returned to foster parent after society removed him without proper statutory notice.
The applicant foster parent applied to the Child and Family Services Review Board to review the respondent society's decision to remove a 10-year-old child from her care after four years.
The society removed the child without providing the required statutory notice.
The Board considered the child's best interests, including his strong attachment to the applicant, his views and wishes to return to her care, and the importance of continuity.
The Board found that the applicant could manage the child's behavioural challenges if provided with adequate supports, such as respite care.
The Board ordered the child returned to the applicant's care.
The court dismissed the mother's appeal of a summary judgment order granting custody to the father, admitting fresh evidence of her ongoing non-cooperation.
The mother (M.W.) appealed a summary judgment decision that placed her child (M.N.D.) in the custody of the father (M.S.) with discretionary access for the mother.
The appeal court admitted fresh evidence regarding the mother's ongoing non-cooperation with the Children's Aid Society (CAS) and her failure to comply with court orders concerning her other children.
The court dismissed the appeal, finding no palpable and overriding errors in the motions judge's factual findings or application of law regarding summary judgment and status review applications.
The fresh evidence further confirmed the appropriateness of the original decision, emphasizing the child's best interests and the need for permanence.
Complaint of non-compliance with settlement agreement dismissed as Society provided adequate reasons for its decisions.
The applicant alleged that the respondent Society failed to comply with the terms of a settlement agreement regarding child protection matters.
The Child and Family Services Review Board held a teleconference hearing to determine compliance.
The Board found that the Society had provided adequate reasons for its decisions regarding the assignment of workers, the reversion to supervised access visits due to domestic incidents, and the expectations for community resources.
The complaint of non-compliance was dismissed.
