Court of Appeal

Decision Information

Decision Content

                                NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL

Citation:  S.U. v. Family and Childrens Services of Yarmouth County,

2005 NSCA 76

 

Date:  20050429

Docket:  CA 236928

Registry: Halifax

 

Between:

S. U.

Appellant

v.

 

Family and Childrens Services of Yarmouth County

 

First Respondent

                                                          - and -

 

                                                           J. U.

                                                                                               Second Respondent

                                                                                                                            

 

Restriction on publication:       Pursuant to s. 94(1) Children and Family Services Act.

                                                             

JUDGE:                         The Honourable Justice M. Jill Hamilton

 

APPEAL HEARD:         April 8, 2005                  

 

SUBJECT:           Child protection, Children and Family Services Act, S.N.S. 1990, c. 5

 

SUMMARY:        A child was apprehended at birth because of her mothers long involvement with child protection agencies involving her five older children who were taken into care and her fathers conviction of sexual assault of his stepdaughter. The trial judge found that it was in the best interests of the child to be placed in the permanent care and custody of the agency.


 

ISSUE:                 Did the trial judge err in law by: (1)  placing too much weight on trivial matters; (2) referring in his decision to the possibility of a review in three or four months time, when such a review would be unlikely to succeed in light of s. 48 (4) and (6) of the Act; (3) not adjourning the disposition hearing to give S.U. more time to improve herself so she would have a better chance of regaining the care and custody of E.U.; (4)  making a decision given the limited evidence before him; and (5)  accepting affidavit evidence of the agency rather than viva voce evidence.  Should the judges decision be set aside because her trial counsels representation of her was incompetent?

 

RESULT:             Appeal dismissed.

 

 

This information sheet does not form part of the courts judgment.  Quotes must be from the judgment, not this cover sheet.  The full court judgment consists of 11  pages.

 

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.