Self-represented (S.B.)

On appeal from a Superior Court decision, the mother challenged the appeal judge's order upholding an extended society care order and varying her access status from access recipient to access holder.

The mother argued that the appeal judge should have ordered a new trial on all issues due to a finding of procedural unfairness regarding the access holder determination.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, holding that a breach of procedural fairness on a discrete issue does not require a new trial on all matters when the appellate court can properly decide the issue based on the evidentiary record.

The court admitted fresh evidence but found it did not change the outcome, as the evidence supported the extended society care order.

A child protection proceeding involving three children, commenced in 2013, in which the Children's Aid Society sought a finding that the children were in need of protection based on risk of sexual harm.

The Society brought a motion to re-open a summary judgment motion that had been argued and was on reserve, to file additional evidence regarding a psychosexual assessment of the father.

The motion to re-open was opposed by the father.

The court dismissed the motion to re-open, finding that the Society had failed to exercise due diligence in obtaining the additional evidence, that the evidence was not decisive, and that the Society had alternative remedies available if the summary judgment motion was unsuccessful.