SP v. Family and Children’s Services of Guelph and Wellington County, 2024 CFSRB 159

CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES REVIEW BOARD

BETWEEN:

SP Applicant

-and-

Family and Children’s Services of Guelph and Wellington County Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Donna A. Wowk Date: December 30, 2024 Citation: 2024 CFSRB 159 Indexed As: SP v Family and Children’s Services of Guelph and Wellington County (CYFSA s.120)

INTRODUCTION

1The Applicant filed an Application with the Child and Family Services ("CFSRB") under section 120 of the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017, S.O. 2017, c. 14, Sched.1. ("the Act").

2The CFSRB found the Application eligible to proceed under sections 120(4)4 and 120(4)5 of the Act.

3In its Response, the Respondent took the position that the Application is not eligible for review by the CFSRB as the matter in relation to which the complaint is filed, is before the Ontario Court of Justice in Guelph ("the OCJ"), by way of a Child Protection Application brought by the Respondent on or about July 31, 2024.

4The CFSRB issued a Case Management Direction dated October 28, 2024 requiring the Respondent to provide all relevant court documents including court orders to the CFSRB. By that Case Management Direction, the Applicant was required to make written submissions on whether the issues in the Application are separate and different from the substantive issues before the court, and the Respondent was provided an opportunity to file a Reply.

5The Applicant filed written submissions. In those submissions, the Applicant elaborated on her allegations against the Respondent. She did not make submissions as to whether her allegations were separate and different from the issues before the OCJ.

6In accordance with the October 28, 2024 Case Management Direction, the Respondent provided the CFSRB with the pleadings that had been filed in the legal proceeding as well as two temporary court orders.

ISSUES

7Is the CFSRB prohibited from reviewing this Application because the subject matter of the complaint has been decided by the court or is before the court?

RESULT

8I find that the issues raised by the Applicant in her Application are issues that relate to the subject matter of the OCJ legal proceeding and that they are all issues that have been or that can be addressed by the OCJ in the context of the child protection proceeding. As such, the CFSRB does not have jurisdiction to conduct this review.

ANALYSIS

9The Applicant is the mother of two children. The Respondent initially provided services to the Applicant in relation to her eldest child. That child has been in the care and custody of his maternal grandparents since early 2016.

10The Respondent most recently opened a file in relation to this family in May 2024. At the time, the Applicant was pregnant with her youngest child, JP, and the Respondent's plan was to provide the Applicant with services prior to JP's birth.

11JP was apprehended with a warrant shortly after his birth, and the Respondent brought the matter before the court by way of a child protection application and a temporary care and custody motion as required by the Act.

12Section 120(8) of the Act provides that the CFSRB cannot conduct a review of a complaint if the subject matter of the complaint is an issue that has been decided by the court or is before the court.

13The Ontario Court of Appeal ruled in Children's Aid Society of Waterloo v. D.D., 2011 ONCA 441, that the mere existence of a child protection proceeding does not bar the CFSRB from reviewing complaints about the services from a children's aid society if the complaints are separate and different from the substantive issues before the court.

14The Applicant's explanation of her complaint in her Application indicates that the essence of the complaint/allegations is that JP was apprehended without clear reasons being provided; that the warrant may have been invalid or it was obtained based on false representations by her family services worker; JP has developmental and medical issues that have been not been addressed by the Respondent who refused her efforts to take the child to a doctor; that the Respondent unreasonably disrupted her supervised access with JP; that the Respondent interfered with her ability to breastfeed JP; and, that the Respondent has not respected her request to have JP anointed with blessings and prayers.

15The concerns raised by the Applicant in her Application are issues that relate to the subject matter of the child protection proceeding and are all issues over which the court has jurisdiction in the context of the child protection proceeding.

16As a party to the child protection proceeding, the Applicant is entitled to present her own evidence to support her claims that the apprehension warrant was without merit or wrongfully obtained. The Applicant's issues with the child's health, the care he is receiving, and her complaints about access are all matters that are before the court in the OCJ proceeding. As far as her request to have the child anointed with blessings and prayers, the Applicant may request an order for this to occur in the OCJ proceeding. The Applicant will also have the opportunity to cross examine the Respondent's witnesses, including the deponents of the affidavits that directly address many of the issues raised by the Applicant, and to make submissions to the court. In other words, her issues are before the court and able to be decided by the court.

ORDER

17The Application is dismissed.

CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER

18Pursuant 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.