The appellant parents appealed a trial decision making their two children Crown wards without access.
The parents had previously been convicted of manslaughter in the death of their middle child due to malnutrition.
On appeal, the parents argued the trial judge made numerous errors, including finding the youngest child in need of protection, excluding the reasons for sentence from their criminal trial, and terminating access.
They also sought to introduce fresh evidence and argued they received ineffective assistance from their trial counsel.
The Superior Court of Justice dismissed the appeal, finding no palpable and overriding errors in the trial judge's factual findings or application of the law.
The court also held that the fresh evidence would not have changed the outcome and that the ineffective assistance of counsel claim was both moot and unfounded.
