The appellant father appealed a summary judgment order finding his 17-year-old daughter to be a child in need of protection and making her a Crown ward.
The father sought to introduce fresh evidence and argued the child was not in need of protection when she left home at age 14.
The Divisional Court admitted the fresh evidence but dismissed the appeal, finding no palpable and overriding error in the motions judge's conclusions.
The court noted the child's clear preference for no contact with her parents and her need for closure to continue her mental health recovery.
