QR v. Bruce Grey Child and Family Services, 2021 CFSRB 67

CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES REVIEW BOARD

BETWEEN:

QR Applicant

-and-

Bruce Grey Child and Family Services Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Catherine Bickley Date: September 27, 2021 Citation: 2021 CFSRB 67 Indexed As: QR v Bruce Grey Child and Family Services (CYFSA s.120)

Introduction

1This is an Application filed on June 28, 2021 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”). The CFSRB found the Application eligible to proceed under section 120(4)4 of the Act.

2This decision explains why the CFSRB is dismissing the Application.

BACKGROUND

3After the Respondent was served with the Application, it sent the CFSRB a copy of a May 26, 2021 Ontario Court of Justice Release Order (under section 2 of the Criminal Code) which imposes the following condition on the Applicant:

Do not contact or communicate in any way either directly or indirectly, by any physical, electronic or other means, with the following: Carolyn CAFIK and the Bruce Grey Child and Family Services in Owen Sound

EXCEPT

• In the presence of or through legal counsel

4The legal counsel who the Applicant listed as his representative on the Application advised that she would not be representing the Applicant in the CFSRB proceeding.

5The Release Order states that the conditions may be varied “with the written consent of the prosecutor, yourself and your sureties, if any” or through application to a judge. It further states, that the conditions remain in effect until “they are cancelled or changed or until you have been discharged, sentenced or otherwise detained by the court.”

6In a July 2, 2021 Case Management Direction (“CMD”), the CFSRB noted:

The CFSRB’s process necessarily involves contact between the parties, including the exchange of documents, participation in a mandatory pre-hearing, and, potentially, participation in a hearing. Due to the pandemic, CFSRB proceedings are currently not being held in person. The Release Order, however, prohibits communication and contact between the parties in any way, which would include email, teleconference and videoconference.

7The CFSRB directed:

The Application is placed on hold unless and until the Applicant provides the CFSRB with evidence that the non-contact condition in the May 26, 2021 Release Order has been varied or is otherwise no longer in effect.

8On August 1, 2021, the Applicant sent the CFSRB a copy of an Ontario Court of Justice Application for Consent Variation of Bail (“Variation Application”). The sections of the Variation Application where a surety and the prosecutor indicate their consent to the requested variation were blank. It was unclear whether the Applicant had filed the Variation Application with the Court and, if so, when.

9On August 4, the CFSRB Registrar wrote to the Applicant, as follows:

The CFSRB acknowledges receipt of the OCJ Application for Consent Variation of Bail.

With reference to your other emails recently sent you are reminded further to the Practice Direction on Communication of the following:

Repetitive or Inappropriate Communications

The CFSRB may refuse to accept communications that are unduly lengthy, repetitive or disrespectful of any other participant of the CFSRB.

Therefore, please refrain from sending any emails other than to update the CFSRB if the variation is granted.

10In response, the Applicant replied “I’m never going to go away ill (sic) submit form After (sic) form and I will get it right”. On August 13, 2021, the Applicant sent the CFSRB an additional Form 2. The CFSRB added it to the existing file rather than opening a new application as it was repetitive of the first application.

11Between August 4, 2021 and August 31, 2021, the Applicant sent approximately 70 more emails to the CFSRB. In those emails, the Applicant refers to the Respondent with inappropriate language, such as “cowards,” “corrupt stupidity,” “idiots,” and also accuses the Respondent of stealing and trafficking his daughter. Some of the Applicant’s emails also refer to the CFSRB in inappropriate language.

12In an August 31, 2021 CMD, the CFSRB directed the Applicant to advise the CFSRB by September 3, 2021 whether he had filed the Variation Application in Court. The August 31, 2021 CMD further directed the Applicant as follows:

The Applicant shall not send the CFSRB any correspondence, by email or otherwise, except correspondence dealing specifically with the Variation Application. He shall also stop using abusive language in his correspondence with the CFSRB.

13The August 31, 2021 CMD also warned:

If the Applicant continues to send the CFSRB abusive correspondence, the CFRSB may take further steps up to and including dismissal of the Application.

14Since the August 31, 2021 CMD, the Applicant has continued to send the CFSRB dozens of abusive emails.

analysis

15Rule A8.1 of the CFSRB’s Rules of Procedure states:

The tribunal may make such orders or give such directions in proceedings before it as it considers proper to prevent abuse of its processes.

16The CFSRB directed the Applicant to do two things:

• provide the CFSRB with evidence that the non-contact condition in the May 26, 2021 Release Order has been varied or is otherwise no longer in effect.

• stop sending abusive emails and only send correspondence dealing with the Variation Order.

17The Applicant has done neither.

18In the absence of a Court order varying the very restrictive terms of the Release Order, the Application cannot proceed. The Applicant sent the CFSRB a copy of a Variation Application which he had completed. However, those sections of the Variation Application which needed to be completed by other individuals before filing with the Court were blank. Despite the direction in the August 31, 2021 CMD, the Applicant has provided no evidence that the Variation Application has been completed or filed in Court.

19Despite being warned by the CFSRB on multiple occasions to cease from sending abusive emails, the Applicant has sent more than 200 abusive emails which accuse the Respondent of illegal and immoral behaviour and use entirely inappropriate language in reference to both the CFSRB and the Respondent.

20The August 31, 2021 CMD warned the Applicant that continuing to send the CFSRB abusive correspondence could result in dismissal of his Application. He has nonetheless sent approximately 75 additional abusive emails since receiving that CMD.

21The Applicant has provided no evidence that he has taken steps to obtain a variation of the Release Order’s terms which act as a barrier to the Application proceeding further in the CFSRB’s process. In the circumstances there is no justification for keeping the Application on hold indefinitely.

22The Applicant has also demonstrated a complete unwillingness to follow the directions of the CFSRB. As noted in paragraph 10 above, the Applicant responded to a letter from the CFSRB’s Registrar by stating he was “never going to go away’. In my view, his actions amount to an abuse of the CFSRB’s processes.

23For these reasons, I conclude that the Application must be dismissed.

order

24The Application is dismissed.

confidentiality order

25Pursuant 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.