In a child protection proceeding under the Child and Family Services Act, an incarcerated caregiver sought to adjourn a scheduled Crown wardship trial until after her release from custody, arguing she required additional time to demonstrate personal progress and prepare her case for the return of the children or alternative kin placement.
The child protection agency opposed the adjournment, emphasizing the statutory timelines governing child protection proceedings and the children’s need for stability and permanency.
The court held that the paramount purpose of the legislation requires prioritizing the best interests of the children over a parent’s litigation interests.
Given the lengthy period the children had already spent in care and the statutory limits on wardship timelines, the proposed delay would undermine the objectives of timely permanency planning.
The motion to adjourn the trial was dismissed.