2 total
Motion to intervene granted to child rights clinic in judicial review of lawyer's good character decision.
Justice for Children and Youth (JFCY) brought a motion for leave to intervene in the Law Society of Ontario's application for judicial review of a decision finding the respondent to be of good character but imposing a condition that he not meet alone with minor children.
The respondent opposed the motion, arguing JFCY lacked a unique perspective, would augment the record, and was in a conflict of interest.
The court granted JFCY leave to intervene on the issues of whether the condition is consistent with Charter values or international law, and whether the Law Society's duty to regulate in the public interest includes protecting children.
The court found no conflict of interest and restricted JFCY from augmenting the evidentiary record or taking a position on the disposition.
Children have a fundamental right to seek independent legal advice without parental or court permission.
The child, who was the subject of a high-conflict custody and child protection dispute, ran away and sought assistance from a legal clinic.
The father obtained an urgent motion order restraining the legal clinic and its lawyer from representing or contacting the child.
The legal clinic and the child appealed.
The Divisional Court allowed the appeal, finding that the motion judge erred by conflating a child's right to standing in a proceeding with their fundamental right to seek independent legal advice.
The court held that children are entitled to seek legal advice without permission from their parents or the court.
