Timothy G. Price

The moving parties, who were foster parents to three children, brought a motion to be added as party respondents in a Crown wardship application.

They wished to adopt the children, but the children's aid society preferred a kin placement with the grandmother.

The court dismissed the motion, finding that it was not a proper case for a best interests comparison within the unresolved child protection application, and noting the foster parents' existing participatory rights under the Child and Family Services Act.

The Children's Aid Society brought a motion for summary judgment seeking an order for Crown wardship with no access.

The parents conceded to the Crown wardship, but the father sought access.

The court found that the father had not seen the child in nearly two years due to criminal activity and substance abuse.

Applying the test for summary judgment under the Family Law Rules and the statutory presumption against access to a Crown ward, the court concluded there was no genuine issue for trial regarding access, as the father could not demonstrate a beneficial and meaningful relationship with the child.

The motion was granted and Crown wardship was ordered without access.