JF v. Children and Family Services for York Region, 2019 CFSRB 13

CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES REVIEW BOARD

BETWEEN:

JF

Applicant

-and-

Children and Family Services for York Region

Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: John F. Spekkens

Date: March 20, 2019

Citation: 2019 CFSRB 13

Indexed as: JF v Children and Family Services for York Region (CYFSA s.120)

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

JF, Applicant

Self-represented

Children and Family Services for York Region, Respondent

Josephine Kiang, Counsel

Introduction

1On February 25, 2019, the Applicant filed this Application under section 120 of the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017, SO 2017, c.14, Sched.1, (the “Act”).

2On March 1, 2019, the Child and Family Services Review Board (“CFSRB”) found that the Application was eligible to proceed under sections 120(4) 5 of the Act.

3The Respondent requests that the Application be dismissed on the basis the complaints and allegations have either been decided by the court or are currently live issues before the court and are therefore outside the CFSRB's jurisdiction.

4The Applicant was directed to provide written submissions on the CFSRB's jurisdiction and, in particular, to address the Ontario Court of Appeal decision in Children's Aid Society of Waterloo v DD, 2011 ONCA 441 (DD). I have reviewed her submissions and, for the reasons set out below, I must dismiss the Application.

BACKGROUND

5The Applicant is the grandmother of two children who were apprehended by the Respondent on November 26, 2018. Child protection proceedings are ongoing in the Superior Court of Justice. The Applicant is not a party to those proceedings and her daughter, the children’s mother, no longer consents to the Respondent contacting the Applicant or speaking to her about the case.

analysis

6Subsection 120(8)(a) of the Act states:

The Board shall not conduct a review of a complaint under this section if the subject of the complaint,

(a)is an issue that has been decided by the court or is before the court.

7The Ontario Court of Appeal ruled in DD that the mere existence of a child protection proceeding does not automatically bar the CFSRB from reviewing a complaint about the services an individual has received from a children’s aid society. In DD, the Court found that service-related complaints about how a children’s aid society handled the temporary placement of DD's children could proceed before the CFSRB. Those complaints “were separate and different from the substantive issues before the court” (para 35).

8The Applicant’s submissions reiterate many of the issues raised in her Application. They focus on her past, and on her view of the role that she would like to play in the care of her grandchildren. Her concerns are about where and with whom her grandchildren will live. That is what the court is in the process of deciding. She has not explained how her Application relates to being heard or receiving reasons for decisions concerning services received from the Society.

9I find that the complaints in the Application are not separate and distinct from the substantive issues that are being considered by the Superior Court of Justice.

10For these reasons, I find the CFSRB does not have jurisdiction to consider this Application.

order

11The Application is dismissed.

confidentiality order

12Pursuant to Rules 9.3 and 9.4 of the CFSRB’s Rules of Procedure, parties and their representatives must not use, share, discuss or disclose any CFSRB documents or decisions or any other documents or information provided or used in this Application with anyone, including through the media or online. The CFSRB prohibits the use of any of this information for any purpose outside of the CFSRB’s proceedings, except with an order of the Court or the CFSRB, as appropriate.