In a child protection motion under Part V of the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017, the court considered whether customary care agreements for Indigenous children were valid despite the absence of parental consent where both parents had been properly served but remained wholly absent and unlocatable.
The court held that parental consent, while generally critical, is not an absolute precondition where exceptional circumstances exist, sustained efforts at engagement have failed, the agreements are comprehensive, culturally grounded, and preserve parental rights, and robust mechanisms for review and judicial oversight remain in place.
The court emphasized the statutory preference for customary care for Indigenous children and distinguished appellate authority where inadequate safeguards and insufficient First Nations involvement had rendered reliance on a customary arrangement impermissible.
The motion was granted, the parents were noted in default, the requirement for their signatures was dispensed with, and the protection application was withdrawn in favour of the customary care agreements.
