Manjeet Singh

Child protection status review concerning a child apprehended at birth due to parental drug use, domestic violence, and instability.

The society sought crown wardship without access.

Evidence showed the mother had significant cognitive limitations, mental health problems, instability, and disengaged from the proceedings, while the father continued to use drugs, lacked insight into domestic conflict, resisted counselling and parenting guidance, and maintained an unhealthy relationship dynamic with the mother despite assurances of separation.

The court held the child remained in need of protection and that returning the child to either parent, even under supervision, posed unacceptable risk.

Applying the best interests analysis under the Child and Family Services Act, the court concluded permanence and stability through adoption were required.

The presumption against access to a crown ward was not rebutted because the parental relationships were not shown to be beneficial and meaningful to the child and access could impair adoption prospects.

In a child protection status review proceeding, the applicant society brought a motion for summary judgment seeking final disposition orders regarding two children.

The court considered whether there was a genuine issue requiring a trial under Rule 16 of the Family Law Rules.

The evidentiary record showed longstanding domestic violence, repeated non‑compliance with court orders, and the parents’ inability to provide safe care despite extensive services and prior interventions.

The responding parent filed no evidentiary materials opposing the motion and relied only on speculation that a trial might produce additional evidence.

The court held that no genuine issue for trial existed and granted summary judgment, ordering custody of one child to the maternal grandparents under s. 57.1 of the Child and Family Services Act and Crown wardship without access for the other child.