AT v. York Region Children’s Aid Society, 2020 CFSRB 77

CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES REVIEW BOARD

BETWEEN:

AT Applicant

-and-

York Region Children’s Aid Society Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Catherine Bickley Date: August 24, 2020 Citation: 2020 CFSRB 77 Indexed As: AT v York Region Children’s Aid Society (CYFSA s.120)

INTRODUCTION

1This is an Application filed with the Child and Family Services Review Board (“CFSRB”) under section 120 of the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017, SO 2017, c.14, Sched.1 (the “Act”).

2This decision explains why the Application is being dismissed.

BACKGROUND

3The CFSRB found the Application eligible to proceed under sections 120(4)4 and 120(4)5 of the Act.

4The parties attempted mediation at a November 8, 2019 Pre-Hearing but did not reach a settlement.

5The CFSRB scheduled a December 13, 2019 Pre-Hearing teleconference to prepare for the hearing of the Application. At the Respondent’s request, and with the Applicant’s agreement, the Pre-Hearing was rescheduled to January 9, 2020.

6The Applicant did not attend the January 9, 2020 Pre-Hearing. The CFRSB then asked her to confirm whether she intended to proceed with her Application. On June 20, 2020, the Applicant wrote to the CFSRB explaining she had been unable to attend the January 9, 2020 Pre-Hearing due to a PTSD episode. She also said she intended to prepare an amended application and requested “reasonable time to attend to my health so I can adequately prepare for and complete the CFSRB process”.

7On January 23, 2020 and February 4, 2020, the CFSRB emailed the Applicant asking how much time she needed before she would be able to participate in a one hour Pre-Hearing teleconference and reminding her the purpose of the teleconference was “to deal with the existing application and to prepare for the hearing” [emphasis added].

8On February 17, 2020 the Applicant responded describing challenges she had experienced related to housing, her health, other legal proceedings and childcare. She again stated she needed time to prepare an amended application and asked for an extension until March 31, 2020. The CFSRB next heard from the Applicant on May 14, 2020 when she sent an email stating she had been injured in a motor vehicle accident.

9In a May 27, 2020 Case Management Direction (“CMD”), the CFSRB directed the Applicant to advise by June 8, 2020 how long she anticipated it would be before she was able participate in a one hour Pre-Hearing teleconference. The Applicant was also directed to provide the CFSRB with a current mailing address.

10The May 27, 2020 CMD warned that if the Applicant did not provide the requested information by June 8, 2020, her Application may be dismissed.

11The Applicant sent the CFSRB an email that same day stating:

I am writing to confirm receipt of the letter of direction dated May 27th 2020.

12The Applicant did not, however, provide the requested information by June 8, 2020. Instead, on June 10, 2020, she wrote:

Please be advised that i do intended (sic) to respond but do require one more weeks time as i have just moved in to a new apartment and an (sic) adjusting which requires more time as per my disabilities.

Thank you for your continued patience.

13The CFSRB gave the Applicant an extension until June 19, 2020.

14As of the date of this decision, the Applicant has not provided the information requested on May 27, 2020 nor has she communicated with the CFSRB since her email of June 10, 2020.

ANALYSIS

15Since January 2020, the CFSRB has made repeated attempts to reschedule the Pre-Hearing. These attempts have been unsuccessful due to health, housing and other challenges the Applicant has faced and significant gaps in time between communications from the Applicant.

16It is now over a year since the Application was filed and more than seven months since the January 9, 2020 Pre-Hearing which the Applicant did not attend due to illness. It is more than two months since the extended deadline for the Applicant to provide the CFSRB with basic information: her current mailing address and an estimated timeframe for when she would be able to participate in a Pre-Hearing.

17When the Applicant has communicated with the CFSRB, she has repeatedly requested time so she can add new information to the Application. The CFSRB has told the Applicant that her desire to amend the Application is not a valid reason to delay the Pre-Hearing as the discussion of procedural issues, such as the proposed amendment of her Application, is one of the purposes of a Pre-Hearing.

18The Applicant has not communicated with the CFSRB since June 10, 2020. She has neither provided the requested information nor provided any explanation for failing to do so.

19I conclude that the Applicant has abandoned her Application.

20For these reasons, the Application is dismissed.

ORDER

21The Application is dismissed.

CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER

22Pursuant 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.