Renée Costantini

The Children's Aid Society brought a motion for summary judgment seeking a protection finding for two children, A.A. and B.B., alleging risk of physical harm, sexual abuse, and emotional harm due to their mother D.C.'s failure to protect them from an abusive male adult, Y.B. The Office of the Children's Lawyer (OCL) supported the protection finding, while the mother opposed it.

The court dismissed the society's motion, finding no genuine issue requiring a trial and concluding that the children were not in need of protection.

The court determined that the risks, primarily related to Y.B., had been mitigated over time, and there was insufficient admissible evidence to establish a present likelihood of serious harm.

The decision emphasized the importance of the 'flexible approach' to the material time period for protection findings and highlighted issues with the admissibility of hearsay evidence in summary judgment motions.

The Children's Aid Society of the Districts of Sudbury and Manitoulin brought a motion for judicial leave to withdraw its child protection application concerning the child A. The mother consented, but the father and the child's legal representative (Office of the Children's Lawyer) opposed the withdrawal.

The court considered criteria for granting leave to withdraw, including the parties' consent, reasons for withdrawal, potential prejudice, and whether the case was purely a custody dispute.

The court emphasized the statutory obligation to hold a "finding in need of protection" hearing, noting the significant delay in the case.

The court found that the society's reason for withdrawal (no present protection concern) was insufficient, especially given the father's evidence of ongoing concerns and the child's opposition to reverting to an unworkable domestic custody order.

The court dismissed the society's motion, emphasizing the need for a finding hearing to ensure the child's best interests and proper judicial oversight of child protection proceedings.