Canada Case Law

Catholic Children's Aid Society of Toronto v. R.E.

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

Fresh evidence admitted; appellate court correctly declined to order a full new trial because the procedural unfairness was limited to a discrete issue (access holder status) that the appeal judge was able to resolve on the existing record; the appeal is dismissed and the extended society care order is upheld.

Source excerpt

• Extended society care order
• Access holder vs access recipient
• Procedural fairness
• Fresh evidence (palmer test)
• Remedy on appeal
• Standard of review

Read case analysis

Brown v. British Columbia (Director of Child, Family and Community Service)

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Leave to appeal was granted in a child protection matter concerning post-CCO access, the interplay between federal Indigenous child welfare legislation and the CFCSA, and alleged procedural unfairness.

• Leave to appeal
• Continuing custody order
• Access/visitation
• Procedural fairness
• Statutory interpretation
• Disclosure obligations

Read case analysis

MG v CG

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

There was no evidentiary basis to find contact with the mother posed safety or therapeutic risk; respondent demonstrated unwillingness or inability to comply with interim orders and to support reintroduction; on balance of best interests the children were placed in primary care of mother with final decision-making, respondent awarded specified parenting time beginning April 2024; child support set at table amount payable by respondent and spousal support entitlement recognized but quantified at $0 given parties' incomes.

Source excerpt

• Parenting arrangements
• Best interests of the child
• Enforcement of interim orders
• Supervised access and exchange
• Voice of the child
• Contempt (dismissed)

Read case analysis

MM v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Court

Social Security Tribunal of Canada

The Tribunal found that CAS placed the child with the appellant and completed the home study required under Ontario adoption law, the appellant has been the primary caregiver and decision-maker and intends to retain permanent custody, and those facts satisfy the statutory test in s.23(1) of the EI Act such that the placement is equivalent to placement for the purposes of adoption; accordingly the appellant is entitled to parental benefits effective September 1, 2023.

Source excerpt

• Parental benefits
• Eligibility
• Placement for adoption
• Home study
• Custody

Read case analysis

R.J.S. v. M.G.W.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court refused to decide a family guardianship and access dispute summarily, finding credibility issues that required a full trial and case management steps.

• Guardianship removal
• Adoption without notice
• Access and contact
• Protection order
• Parental alienation
• Credibility findings

Read case analysis

L.M. v. Peel Children's Aid Society

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Court of Appeal applied the CYFSA to the appeal and, applying a cautious summary judgment approach appropriate to child protection, concluded the undisputed factual findings established the children were in need of protection and that extended society care was in their best interests; the court further held the appeal judge erred in denying access because judicial notice could not be taken that access would impair adoption prospects and the record plus concession by Peel CAS supported granting access, so access was ordered and the detailed terms of access remitted to the Ontario Court of…

Source excerpt

• Extended society care
• Access orders
• Summary judgment
• Judicial notice
• Transitional legislation
• Best interests of the child

Read case analysis

A.R. v. M.B.

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Court dismissed the appeal because the appellant failed to meet the evidentiary threshold for the recognized exceptions to the rule that adoption terminates birth-parent access: there was insufficient evidence of a post-adoption relationship or of assurances of continued contact, and no prima facie evidence that permitting the access application to proceed would be in the child's best interests; therefore the appellant lacked standing under s.21(1) CLRA in light of s.160 CFSA (now s.219 CYFSA).

Source excerpt

• Access
• Standing
• Adoption
• Best interests of the child
• Termination of parental rights
• Children's law reform act

Read case analysis

Nova Scotia (Community Services) v. J.R.

Court

Nova Scotia Family Court

On the balance of probabilities the Minister proved that placement of H. with her mother would expose H. to a substantial risk of physical and/or emotional harm and that less intrusive alternatives were insufficient or unavailable; given the child's urgent need for a stable, trauma-informed placement the court ordered H. placed in the permanent care and custody of the Minister and declined to make an access order.

Source excerpt

• Permanent care and custody
• Best interests of the child
• Access/visitation
• Risk of harm
• Services to preserve family integrity

Read case analysis

Nova Scotia (Community Services) v. J.M.

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The Minister failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that permanent care and adoption was in the children’s best interests; the evidence established the grandparents’ plan was viable, proactive and would adequately protect the children (parents can assist under supervision); the Minister’s asserted risks were speculative or unsubstantiated, so the court dismissed the Minister’s application and granted leave and sole custody to the grandparents under the Maintenance and Custody Act.

Source excerpt

• Permanent care and custody
• Grandparent custody/leave under maintenance and custody act / parenting and support act
• Best interests of the child
• Parental capacity assessment
• Placement with relatives vs agency plan

Read case analysis

M.Z. and G.Z. (Re)

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court granted a petition to change an adopted child’s legal name and birthdate, finding the orders were in the child’s best interests under parens patriae jurisdiction.

• Change of name
• Correction of birthdate
• Parens patriae jurisdiction
• Best interests of the child
• Medical age assessment evidence
• Parens-patriae

Read case analysis