Applicant v. Family and Children’s Services of Renfrew County, 2011 CFSRB 31

CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES REVIEW BOARD

Applicant

v.

Family and Children’s Services of Renfrew County

REASONS FOR DECISION

Date: September 13, 2011

Citation: 2011 CFSRB 31

Indexed as: Applicant v. Family and Children’s Services of Renfrew County

(CFSA s.36)

1The Applicant, [ ] filed an application under section 36 of the Child and Family Services Act R.S.O. 1990 c. C.11 (the “Act”) to the Child and Family Services Board (the “Board”) on May 2, 2011, for a review and determination of his placement at [ ] (the “Facility”).

2The Applicant brought this application because he had his placement reviewed by the Residential Placement Advisory Committee (“RPAC”) on February […], 2011 and was dissatisfied with its recommendation that he remain at the Facility where he was placed by Family and Children’s Services of Renfrew County (the “Society”).

3This Application was heard by way of an oral hearing that commenced on July 6, 2011. The Board is empowered to determine, based on the best interests of the Applicant, the appropriate placement for him. The issue was whether or not a less restrictive placement, such as a community based therapeutic group home or foster home, was appropriate and available.

4The matter was adjourned to September 7, 2011 to provide the Applicant with the opportunity to call a witness who was not available in July. In the intervening period, the Applicant attended before the Youth Justice Court on some outstanding criminal charges. On July […], 2011, the Court made an order for deferred custody requiring the Applicant to reside in such place as the Provincial Director or the Provincial Director’s delegate may specify. At present, the specified placement is the Facility.

5On September 7, 2011, the Board heard arguments from both parties that the Board no longer had jurisdiction in this matter pursuant to the section 34 of the Child and Family Services Act, which reads as follows:

34. (1) In this section,

“residential placement” does not include,

(a) A placement made under the Young Offenders Act (Canada), under the Youth Criminal Justice Act (Canada) or under Part IV (Youth Justice).

6The Board finds that the CFSA specifically excludes from review any placements that are governed by the Youth Criminal Justice Act (“YCJA”). These placements are not subjected to the RPAC process and there is no appeal to the Board in these circumstances.

7While the Board had the necessary jurisdiction to hear this matter before July 11, 2011, once an order was made pursuant to the YCJA respecting the Applicant’s placement, jurisdiction was lost. As such, the Board no longer has jurisdiction to make any determination in this matter.

DECISION

8The Board will not proceed in this matter as it has no jurisdiction over the Applicant’s placement.

Gregory Price

Presiding Member

Denyse Diaz

Board Member

Andrea Himel

Board Member