Nova Scotia (Community Services) v. C.L.D.

Nova Scotia (Community Services) v. C.L.D.

The proceeding was a variation under s.39(9) because the 30‑day interim stage had been concluded; on a variation the parent seeking return bears the burden to prove, on reasonable and probable grounds, that there have been significant changes since the last order and that a supervision order will adequately protect the child; applying that standard the court found the requisite changes and ordered the child returned to the mother under supervision with conditions.

Citation
2014 NSSC 21
Parties
Applicant: M.C.S.; Respondent: C.L.D.
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 February 2014
Procedural Posture
Child Protection Placement/variation Under the Children and Family Services Act / Placement Hearing Characterized as a Variation Pursuant to S.39(9) Following Completion of the 30‑day Interim Hearing Stage
Outcome
Proceeding declared a variation under s.39(9); child returned to mother's care under supervision of the Minister.
Legal Topics
Interim Hearing, Placement Hearing, Variation Under S.39(9), Burden of Proof, Supervision Order, Parentification, Religious Belief and Decision‑making, Homelessness, Drug Use, School Enrollment
Source Language
English
Family Law Child Protection Administrative Law Statutory Interpretation Interim Hearing Placement Hearing Variation Under S.39(9) Burden of Proof +6 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M.C.S.

Applicant

C.L.D.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Child Protection Placement/variation Under the Children and Family Services Act / Placement Hearing Characterized as a Variation Pursuant to S.39(9) Following Completion of the 30‑day Interim Hearing Stage

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a Placement Hearing is a continuation of the 30‑day interim hearing or a variation under s.39(9)
  2. 2 What burden and standard of proof apply on a variation application under s.39(9) of the Children and Family Services Act
  3. 3 Whether there have been significant changes since the last order such that supervision will adequately protect the child

Ratio Decidendi

The proceeding was a variation under s.39(9) because the 30‑day interim stage had been concluded; on a variation the parent seeking return bears the burden to prove, on reasonable and probable grounds, that there have been significant changes since the last order and that a supervision order will adequately protect the child; applying that standard the court found the requisite changes and ordered the child returned to the mother under supervision with conditions.

Court Disposition

Proceeding declared a variation under s.39(9); child returned to mother's care under supervision of the Minister.

Orders

  • Child returned to the care of the mother under supervision of the Minister
  • Mother to co‑operate with and follow the advice of the Minister