|
Appeal - Standard of Review (SOR) - Exception for Child Protection. T.M.N. v Child and Family Services of Grand Erie (formerly C.A.S. of Haldimand Norfolk)
In T.M.N. v Child and Family Services of Grand Erie (formerly C.A.S. of Haldimand Norfolk) (Div Court, 2023) the Divisional Court, while ostensibly assigning the normal appeal standard of review (correctness for errors of law, palpable and overriding for errors of fact and mixed fact and law) to a child protection appeal, really applies a highly deferential overall standard - undifferentiated by the type of error being considered:[30] This Court has previously commented on the standard of review to be applied in the context of child protection appeals. The court owes a special duty to protect the safety and well-being of children, as the best interests of the children are the paramount concern in child protection proceedings (see: A.L.B. v. Durham Children’s Aid Society, 2021 ONSC 8041 (Div. Ct.)). The standard of review on appeal set out in Housen v. Nikolaisen, 2002 SCC 33 remains applicable, as both parties agree, with that special duty in mind. An appeal court in a child protection case may interfere with the judge’s conclusion only if he [or she] made an error in principle, misapprehended the evidence or arrived at a clearly unreasonable result (see: M.F. v. Family and Children Services of Lanark, Leeds and Grenville, 2013 ONSC 702).
|
