Court File and Parties
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
B E T W E E N:
J. B. and E. B. Applicants
- and -
CATHOLIC CHILDREN’S AID SOCIETY OF TORONTO Respondent
Counsel: Kerry K. Gearin, for the Applicants Merrick Siegel, for the Applicants Ron Shulman, Student-at-Law, for the Applicants Helen Murphy, for the Respondent Dena Moyal, for the Children’s Lawyer
HEARD: December 17, 2004
Oral Reasons for Judgment
BENOTTO S. J.: (Orally)
Background
1This matter came before the Divisional Court on the direction of Justice Goodman, who yesterday determined that the nature of the application was that of judicial review. It was not clear at that point whether the Director was going to conduct a review. Today, counsel for the C.C.A.S. says that the review will take place, but that during this process which may take up to a year, the children should be returned for placement elsewhere.
2The C.C.A.S. wishes to remove both children today from their foster home and put them in separate homes. T. is seven. She has been in this home since she was three months old. M. is almost fourteen and he has been in this home since he was four. Both children are Crown Wards.
Analysis
3It is clear from the material that there are difficulties between the C.C.A.S. and the foster parents. While this is indeed unfortunate, we must remember who are the adults and who are the children. The children cannot be made to pay the price. Their best interests demand that they remain in this home. There is no evidence of urgency or threat of immediate harm to the children. On the contrary, there is compelling evidence that the children should stay in this home; they need continuity of care and they need to be together.
4The C.C.A.S. wishes to separate the children from each other and from essentially the only home they have ever known and to move them to unknown quarters, one week before Christmas. This to me is incomprehensible. There is no reason that the concerns of the C.C.A.S. cannot be managed without this wrenching of the children at this time of year particularly.
Disposition
5Pending review process, the children will remain in the home and the injunction of Justice Goodman will continue.
Costs
6There will be submissions as to costs as counsel can agree.
BENOTTO S. J.
Date of Reasons for Judgment: December 17, 2004
Date of Release: December 20, 2004
COURT FILE NO.: 664/04
DATE: 20041217
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
B E T W E E N:
J. and E. B. Applicants
- and -
CATHOLIC CHILDREN’S AID SOCIETY OF TORONTO Respondent
ORAL REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
BENOTTO S. J.
Date of Reasons for Judgment: December 17, 2004
Date of Release: December 20, 2004