2017 ONCJ 762, 2017 ONCJ 762

WARNING The court hearing this matter directs that the following notice should be attached to the file: This is a case under

Part III of the Child and Family Services Act and is subject to one or more of subsections 45 (7), 45(8) and 45(9) of the Act. These subsections and subsection 85(3) of the Child and Family Services Act , which deals with the consequences of failure to comply, read as follows: 45.—

(7) Order excluding media representatives or prohibiting publication. — The court may make an order, . . . (

c) prohibiting the publication of a report of the hearing or a specified part of the hearing, where the court is of the opinion that . . . publication of the report, . . ., would cause emotional harm to a child who is a witness at or a participant in the hearing or is the subject of the proceeding.

(8) Prohibition: identifying child. — No person shall publish or make public information that has the effect of identifying a child who is a witness at or a participant in a hearing or the subject of a proceeding, or the child's parent or foster parent or a member of the child's family.

(9) Idem: order re adult. — The court may make an order prohibiting the publication of information that has the effect of identifying a person charged with an offence under this Part. . . . 85.—

(3) Idem. — A person who contravenes subsection 45(8) or 76(11) (publication of identifying information) or an order prohibiting publication made under clause 45(7)(

c) or subsection 45(9), and a director, officer or employee of a corporation who authorizes, permits or concurs in such a contravention by the corporation, is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable to a fine of not more than $10,000 or to imprisonment for a term of not more than three years, or to both. CITATION : Catholic Children’s Aid Society of Toronto v. R.M. , 2017 ONCJ 762 DATE : November 14, 2017 COURT FILE NO. C11053/17 ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE B E T W E E N: ) ) CATHOLIC CHILDREN’S AID SOCIETY OF TORONTO RACHEL BUHLER, for the APPLICANT ) APPLICANT ) ) - and - )

R.M. and M.C. RESPONDENTS RENATA KIRSZBAUM, for the RESPONDENT, R.M. AARON DAVID, for the RESPONDENT, M.C. ) BETH PURDON- MCLELLAN, on behalf of THE OFFICE OF THE CHILDREN’S LAWYER, for the children ) ) ) ) ) HEARD: IN CHAMBERS JUSTICE S.B. SHERR ENDORSEMENT [ 1 ] On September 27, 2017, on consent, the court adjourned the respondent R.M.’s (the father’

s) motion to place his three children in his temporary care and custody until November 16, 2017. [ 2 ] In response to the father’s motion the society had introduced evidence that a urine screen test taken by the father had tested positive for Ethyl Glucuonide, Benzolyecgonine, THCA and cocaine. [ 3 ] In its endorsement dated September 29, 2017, the court found that the evidence of the urine screen test results, as presented by the society, did not meet the threshold of being credible and trustworthy evidence as required by subsection 51 (7) of the Child and Family Services Act .

See: Catholic Children’s Aid Society of Toronto v. R.M., 2017 ONCJ 661 . [ 4 ] The court determined that it needed to hear evidence about whether urine testing is reliable evidence about what it purports to prove. It also required evidence that the testing done in this case complied with generally accepted standards in the field. [ 5 ] The court informed the parties that a voir dire would be required to determine the admissibility of the urine screen test results, if the society still wished to rely upon them on the return of the motion.

The court’s endorsement set out what evidence would assist it in determining this admissibility issue.

[ 6 ] The court directed the society to confirm by Form 14C, at least five days before the motion, if it would still be relying upon the father’s urine screen test results. [ 7 ] The society has sent in a Form 14C stating that it will not be relying on the father’s urine screen test results on the return of the motion. Accordingly, this will no longer be an issue on the father’s motion and the evidence about the father’s urine screen tests set out in paragraphs 6 and 7 of the affidavit of Yogesh Patel, sworn on September 26, 2017 is struck. Released: November 14, 2017 Justice S.B. Sherr