DATE: 20040521

DOCKET: C41474

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

RE:

KENORA-PATRICIA CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES (Applicant/Respondent) – and – A.M. and M.M. (Respondents/Appellants) – and – H.M., A.M.2 and L.M. (Respondents/Respondent) – and – THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO (Intervener/Respondent)

BEFORE:

WEILER, ROSENBERG and LANG JJ.A.

COUNSEL:

J. Sebastian Winny

for the appellants A.M. and M.M.

Gary J. McCallum

for the respondent Kenora-Patricia Child and Family Services

Shaun Nakatsuru

for the intervener the Attorney General of Ontario

Shane Pearce and Caterina E. Tempesta

for the Office of the Children’s Lawyer

HEARD:

May 20, 2004

On appeal from the order of Justice Helen M. Pierce of the Superior Court of Justice dated February 19, 2004.

A P P E A L B O O K E N D O R S E M E N T

[1] We are satisfied that Justice Pierce did not err in finding that Justice Little judicially exercised her discretion. Nor did Justice Pierce err in making a trial management order.

[2] We do not interpret s. 37(2)(l)’s reference to “the child is brought before the court” as requiring that the child must be physically present in the courtroom.

[3] Contrary to the appellant’s argument, ss. 47(1), 50(2), 52 and 57(1) of the Act do contemplate a bifurcated hearing, which need not be a continuous hearing.

[4] We would not make an order as to costs.