DC v. The Children's Aid Society of Toronto, 2026 CFSRB 73

BETWEEN:

Applicant

-and-

The Children's Aid Society of Toronto

Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Tracy Foster

Date: May 07, 2026

Citation: 2026 CFSRB 73

Indexed as: DC v The Children’s Aid Society of Toronto (CYFSA s.120)

OVERVIEW

1This is an Application filed under section 120 and section 119 of the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017, S.O. 2017, c.14, Sched.1, (the “Act”).

2The Applicant is the mother of the child named in the Application. She filed her application with the CFSRB on May 4, 2026.

3This decision explains why the Application does not contain sufficient information for the CFSRB to determine eligibility.

ISSUE

4The issue is:

Is the Application eligible for review by the CFSRB?

RESULT

5The CFSRB finds that the Application is not eligible for review.

ANALYSIS

6The Applicant’s complaints appear to relate to a custody court matter that took place in 1995/1996, which the Applicant indicates she “lost.” She alleges that one of the Respondent workers who was involved with the custody matter is a current friend of her sister’s husband through the social media site Facebook. She further alleges the Respondent used a “fabricated” name for her during the court proceeding. She also alleges she was forced to plead guilty in a criminal case involving “Attempt to Abduct Under 16.”

7The Applicant checked off the following box on her Application under section 7:

The society did not provide you with an opportunity to be heard and represented when decisions affecting your interests were made and to be heard when you expressed concerns about the services you are receiving.

8The Application did not contain sufficient detail about the Applicants complaints and on the morning of May 5, 2026, the CFSRB Case Processing Officer sent an email stating:

The CFSRB acknowledges receipt of your application. We are unable to process your application because you have not provided sufficient detail about your complaints. For applications like yours, the CFSRB has limited jurisdiction. The outcomes that you seek are beyond the CFSRB’s jurisdiction.

Please reply to this email with more details for your application. Once we have received those details, we will determine if your application is eligible.

9On the afternoon of May 5, the Applicant responded to the CFSRB in a series of emails indicating:

The Applicant recently discovered the Respondent worker who apprehended her daughter and participated in the custody court case in 1995-96 is a current Facebook friend of the Applicant’s sister’s husband who she has never met.
The Respondent fabricated her name in the court proceeding in order to confuse the judge and transcript.
After the apprehension of the child and before the court case the Applicant was charged with “Attempt abduct Under 16” in a fabricated case to conceal her motherhood.

10On May 6, the Applicant emailed the CFSRB a copy of the same complaints she sent to the Law Society of Ontario along with a copy the letter dated June 25, 2025 responding to her complaints and finding they cannot intervene in matters that have been determined by the court. The letter states:

“The information raised in this complaint relates to procedural issue (sic) for the determination of the Court. You should have raised your concerns with the Court during the proceeding, as the Law Society cannot intervene in matters under the authority of the Court.”

The CFSRB’s jurisdiction – issues before the court

11Regarding the Applicant’s complaints about the name used in custody proceedings and her pleadings in a criminal matter, similar to the Law Society of Ontario, under subsection 120(8)(a) of the Act, the CFSRB does not have jurisdiction to review a complaint if the subject of the complaint “is an issue that has been decided by the court or is before the court”.

12The Applicant’s complaints involve procedural issues in court and charges in a criminal case. These are not within the CFSRB’s jurisdiction and are matters that should have been raised at the time of the court proceedings. Therefore, the CFSRB is unable to review these complaints.

Matters that the CFSRB may review

13In respect to the Applicant’s additional complaint regarding the historical Respondent worker being a Facebook friend of her sister’s husband that she has never met, subsection 120(1) of the Act states that a person may complain about a service they sought or received from a society and that complaint may be made to either the society or the CFSRB, or both.

14For a complaint to be eligible for review by the CFSRB under section 120 of the Act, an Applicant must meet two threshold tests. First, an Applicant must demonstrate that they have sought or received a service, as defined under subsection 2(1) of the Act, from a children’s aid society or Indigenous child and family well-being agency. Once that is established, then the CFSRB must determine whether the Applicant’s complaint set out in their application relates to the service they sought or received.

15The CFSRB finds that the Applicant’s complaint does not relate to a service provided by the Respondent and is therefore not eligible for review.

Remedies available to the CFSRB jurisdiction

16In her Application, the Applicant seeks the following remedies:

This relationship and any others like it be ended for now and all time.
Such punishment as required by law and society rules regarding breach of confidentiality. 3-Such punishment as required by law regarding Alienation of Affection and Fraudulent Misrepresentation to the legal system

17Under Section 120(7) of the Act, the CFSRB may:

a) order the society to proceed with the complaint made by the complainant in accordance with the complaint review procedure established by regulation;

b) order the society to provide a response to the complainant within a period specified by the Board;

c) order the society to comply with the complaint review procedure established by regulation or with any other requirements under this Act;

d) order the society to provide written reasons for a decision to a complainant; or

e) dismiss the complaint.

18Based on the above, the Applicant’s complaints are not within the jurisdiction of the CFSRB, nor are the remedies she is seeking.

ORDER

19The Application is dismissed.

CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER

20Pursuant 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.

Tracy Foster

Member