2022 QCCQ 14174, 2022 QCCQ 14174

Droit de la famille — 222433 2022 QCCQ 14174 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] TOWN OF [...] Youth Division No: 640-51-000030-227 DATE: June 13, 2022 (written judgment rendered on June 23, 2022) ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE PEGGY WAROLIN J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: X , born on [...], 2018 [SOCIAL WORKER 1] , Youth Protection worker, duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A Applicant - respondant and A Mother - respondant and B Father - applicant ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT (Section 37 al 3 of the Code of civil procedure ) ______________________________________________________________________ WARNING: The Youth Protection Act forbids the publishing or broadcasting of information allowing for a child or the child’s parents to be identified.

Any person who contravenes this provision commits an offence and is liable to a fine (sections 11.2, 11.2.1 and 135 Y.P.A.). [ 1 ] The Director of Youth Protection (DYP) had asked the Court to review a decision rendered on May 19, 2020, regarding the child X, born on [...], 2018. At that date the Court declared the security and development endangered [1] and entrusted the child to Ms. C and Mr.

D with measures until May 31, 2021. [ 2 ] Due to numerous issues in the foster family, the DYP entrusted the child to an emergency foster family until the hearing on the revision. [ 3 ] The hearing was started and had to be postponed many times for different reasons. [ 4 ] During that time, the father got involved more and more with the child. He came to visit her in Town A and he also travels with her in Town B because she had a medical appointment there.

Due to the bad weather, he had to stay longer in Town B with the child and everything went very well. [ 5 ] Except for contacts, the mother never exercise any parental responsibilities toward the child. [ 6 ] Considering the very god adaptation of the child to her father and his desire to take care of her on a daily basis, the DYP started a process of reintegration under the father’s care.

The child travelled in Town C with him and adapted very well to her new environment. [ 7 ] After a few months and the hearing under the application for revision not being completed, the father files an application for sole custody. [ 8 ] The mother agrees with this application, but asks for contacts. [ 9 ] The father agrees with the contacts between the child, her mother and the extended maternal family, who take care of the child for at least 2 years. The father already communicate on a very regular basis with them, even if the child not always asks for such contacts.

He organizes video calls, he sends them some pictures and videos of the child and he welcomes them at his place when they have to go to Town C. [ 10 ] The father also agrees to travel to the North to maintain the child in contact with her culture. [ 11 ] The Court determined some conditions for those contacts to happen because the Court does not want the father to assume alone financially and in time for the transportation. Doing so, the Court impose a minimum of 3 contacts per year in Town A or in Town C, and recommends that those contacts take place at least for Christmas and during the summer.

[ 12 ] The contacts will take place in accordance with: - The school calendar when the child will be at school age; - The restrictions of the travelling (bad weather, flights cancelled, flights delayed, etc.); - The pre-confirmation from the maternal side that they are available to exercise the contacts; - The father’s financial capacity. [ 13 ] With such difficulties to be considered, no reproach should be raised against the father if the contacts are not feasible. The Court saw that, currently, everybody has very good will to maintain a good collaboration.

The Court invites the parties to keep such state of mind in the future for the best interest of the child.

FOR THOSE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 14 ] GRANTS the application; [ 15 ] GRANTS the sole custody of the child to the father; [ 16 ] ORDERS that the child benefit from contacts with her mother and her maternal extended family by any technological way upon agreement between the parties; [ 17 ] ORDERS that the child benefit from 3 contacts per year with her mother and her maternal extended family, in Town C or in Town A; [ 18 ] RECOMMENDS that those contacts take place for Christmas, during the summer and at another time to be agreed upon between the parties; [ 19 ] ORDERS that the contacts take place in accordance with: - The school calendar when the child will be at school age; - The restrictions of the travelling (bad weather, flights cancelled, flights delayed, etc.); - The pre-confirmation from the maternal side that they are available to exercise the contacts; - The father’s financial capacity. [ 20 ] THE WHOLE without cost. __________________________________ PEGGY WAROLIN , J.C.Q.

Me Adèle Cyr, attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Cassandra Neptune, attorney for the child Me Angèle Tommasel, attorney for the mother Me Josselin Breton, attorney for the father Date of hearing: June 13, 2022