British Columbia (Children and Family Development) v MKC, 2024 BCPC 55.

Director is seeking order returning R.M.C to A.W.’s care under 6-month supervision order, pursuant to Children, Family and Community Service Act (CFCSA), s 41(1)(a) – Director also consents to child being returned to M.K.C. Brecknell J conducts a best interest of the child analysis according to An Act Respecting First Nations, Inuit and Métis Children, Youth and Families (Federal Act) and determines this is placement with A.W., subject to supervision terms. 

Should the child, R.M.C. be returned to the care of A.W. or M.K.C., pursuant to s 41(1)(a) of the CFCSA?

[50] When the hearing commenced on March 28, 2024 I expressed concern about the lack of formal participation by the Chief and Council of the [omitted for publication] Band. While I understand that they have chosen not to participate in what they consider to be a flawed process in light of their traditional laws and customs it would have been helpful to me to listen to and consider their perspectives, particularly in light of the Federal Act that requires the Court to give consideration to such participation.

[54] The Director submitted that the Federal Act prioritizes the placement of the Child with a parent over other family members which would favour M.C. However, that is only part of the wording of Section 16 of the Federal Act. It also states that the placement priority for a child must be “to the extent that it is consistent with the best interests of the child”

None.

• Section 4: Minimum standards
• Section 9: Principles
• Section 10
• Section 11: Effect of services
• Section 16
• 16(1) Priority

Child, Family and Community Service Act, RSBC 1996, c 46. (CFCSA)
Sections 2; 3; 4(1); 13(1); 16(1); 29.1(1); 30(1); 33.2; 35(1) & (2)(d); 41; 41.1; 55(1) (2) (5) (6).

Family Law Act, SBC 2011, c 25. (FLA)

British Columbia (Child, Family and Community Service) v SH, 2020 BCPC 82.