I.K. v. Child and Family Services Review Board, 2020 ONSC 5123

CITATION: I.K. v. Child and Family Services Review Board, 2020 ONSC 5123

COURT FILE NO.:

DATE: 20200831

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - DIVISIONAL COURT - ONTARIO

The court hearing this matter directs that the following notice be attached to the file:

This matter is subject to a publication ban pursuant to subsections 87(8) and 87(9) of the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017. These subsections and subsection 142(3) of the Child, Youth and Services Act, 2017 deal with the consequences of failure to comply with the statutory publication ban. Those sections provide:

87(8) Prohibition re identifying child — No person shall publish or make public information that has the effect of identifying a child who is a witness at or a participant in a hearing or the subject of a proceeding, or the child’s parent or foster parent or a member of the child’s family.

(9) Prohibition re identifying person charged — The court may make an order prohibiting the publication of information that has the effect of identifying a person charged with an offence under this Part.

142(3) Offences re publication — A person who contravenes subsection 87(8) or 134(11) (publication of identifying information) or an order prohibiting publication made under clause 87(7)(c) or subsection 87(9), and a director, officer or employee of a corporation who authorizes, permits or concurs in such a contravention by the corporation, is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable to a fine of not more than $10,000 or to imprisonment for a term of not more than three years, or to both.

RE: I.K. v. Child and Family Services Review Board

BEFORE: D.L. Corbett J.

COUNSEL: I.K. self-represented

DATE: August 31, 2020, In Chambers, In Writing

CASE MANAGEMENT ENDORSEMENT

[1] The applicant has provided a lengthy response to the court’s notice pursuant to R.2.1.01. It does not, however, require lengthy reasons. This endorsement should be read together with this court’s prior endorsements (2020 ONSC 4591, 2020 ONSC 4635 and 2020 ONSC 4890).

[2] The applicant denies the authoritative effect of court orders made previously on the basis of his reading of amendments to underlying legislation. This position is misconceived. Amendments to the Child and Family Services Act do not have the effect of invalidating orders previously made by the courts.

[3] The orders for Crown wardship for the two children are final and may not be reviewed in this court. The adoptions of the children are final and the applicant may not appeal them or have them reviewed in this court. The applicant was a party to the Crown wardship proceedings, as reflected in the court records and endorsements of those proceedings, and his denial that there were prior court orders has been disingenuous.

[4] I understand that the applicant does not agree with the orders for Crown wardship without access. I understand that he does not agree that his children should have been adopted by others and that his parental status should have been terminated. However, these steps have been taken, in accordance with the law, and these decisions are now final and no longer subject to challenge.

[5] There is one aspect of the application that could, conceivably, be a basis for an application in this court: the recent decision of the Child and Family Services Review Board respecting the CAS explanation regarding photographs and presents for the children. In his responses to this court’s inquiries, it is clear that the applicant contests this recent decision on the basis that he considers that it is premised on unauthoritative Crown wardship orders and subsequent adoptions. No other basis for challenging the recent decision in this court has been put forward by the applicant. Therefore, this complaint is frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of process, and so it too should be dismissed.

[6] The applicant has made it clear that he will not accept authoritative court decisions and must be restrained from further fruitless legal proceedings.

[7] Order to go as follows:

(a) The applicant’s two pending applications in Divisional Court are dismissed as frivolous, vexatious and abuses of process pursuant to R.2.1.01, without costs.

(b) Pursuant to the court’s inherent jurisdiction to control its own process and R.2.1.02((3), the applicant is prohibited from commencing any proceedings in any court in Ontario or from taking any steps in any proceeding in Ontario related to or in any way connected with the Crown wardship without access ordered in respect to his children, and/or the subsequent adoptions of his children, without first obtaining leave from the court.

(c) In seeking leave from the court pursuant to b., the applicant must bring a motion without notice before a Justice of the Superior Court of Justice to obtain permission to proceed with litigation. The applicant must include in his motion materials seeking leave a copy of this endorsement and the court’s prior endorsements reported at 2020 ONSC 4591, 2020 ONSC 4635 and 2020 ONSC 4890. In addition, the applicant may file an affidavit of no more than ten pages in length in support of his request for leave. This requirement to obtain leave applies to proceedings before any court within Ontario other than the Ontario Court of Appeal, the Federal Court of Canada and the Supreme Court of Canada.

[8] This endorsement is effective from the time an unsigned copy is transmitted to the applicant by Divisional Court staff by email. A signed copy of the endorsement will be transmitted in due course.

D.L. Corbett J.

Date: August 31, 2020