2 total
The court dismissed a mother's application for leave to bring a status review for her child.
The respondent mother, S.M.L., sought leave to bring a status review application for her child, Z., who had been in extended society care and with the same foster parents for over two years.
The court applied the five-part test from Catholic Children's Aid of Metro Toronto v. B.A.F., which requires the applicant to demonstrate bona fide intent, that relief cannot be obtained otherwise, unusual circumstances, that the review would accomplish the Act's purposes, and a prima facie case.
The court found that the mother failed to establish unusual circumstances (as a parent's improvement alone is not unusual) and failed to establish a prima facie case, primarily due to ongoing instability in her life and the significant disruption it would cause to the special needs child's established stability and attachment with the foster parents.
The application for leave was dismissed, prioritizing the child's best interests and permanency.
A lawyer was removed from a child protection case due to a conflict of interest arising from prior representation of the agency.
A motion to remove counsel for a foster parent in a child protection application.
The respondent child and family services agency sought to disqualify the applicant's lawyer, who had previously represented the agency in related proceedings involving the same child.
The court applied the test from MacDonald Estate v. Martin to determine whether a conflict of interest existed.
The court found that the lawyer had access to confidential information as counsel of record for the agency in prior proceedings, including the Customary Care Agreement and the termination of the Crown Wardship Order.
The court held that the public, represented by the reasonably informed person, would not be satisfied that no misuse of confidential information would occur.
The lawyer was removed from the record.
