Reference re subsection 52(1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

Reference re subsection 52(1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

The court held the numerous Turmel Kit based claims were moot because the MMPR had been declared invalid in Allard and replaced by the ACMPR, the pleadings lacked necessary particulars and disclosed no reasonable cause of action, many claims were frivolous, vexatious or an abuse of process, and damages were not available absent allegations of bad faith; exercising its discretion the court struck all listed claims without leave to amend and granted no costs.

Citation
2017 FC 30
Parties
Applicants/plaintiffs: Various self-represented plaintiffs including John Turmel, Bradley Hunt, Derek Francisco; Respondent/defendant: Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
11 January 2017
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Challenge to Medical Cannabis Regulatory Regime; Motion to Strike Under Rule 369 / Motion in Writing Under Rule 369; Case Management Disposition
Outcome
Defendant/Respondent's motion granted; all listed claims/applications struck without leave to amend; no costs awarded
Legal Topics
Charter S 52(1) Declarations, Mootness, Abuse of Process, Frivolous and Vexatious Pleadings, Damages for Unconstitutional Legislation, Judicial Review
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Civil Procedure Criminal Law Controlled Substances Charter S 52(1) Declarations Mootness Abuse of Process Frivolous and Vexatious Pleadings +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Various self-represented plaintiffs including John Turmel, Bradley Hunt, Derek Francisco

Applicants/plaintiffs

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Challenge to Medical Cannabis Regulatory Regime; Motion to Strike Under Rule 369 / Motion in Writing Under Rule 369; Case Management Disposition

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claims are moot given the Allard decision and enactment of the ACMPR
  2. 2 Whether the pleadings disclose a reasonable cause of action
  3. 3 Whether the pleadings are frivolous, vexatious or an abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

The court held the numerous Turmel Kit based claims were moot because the MMPR had been declared invalid in Allard and replaced by the ACMPR, the pleadings lacked necessary particulars and disclosed no reasonable cause of action, many claims were frivolous, vexatious or an abuse of process, and damages were not available absent allegations of bad faith; exercising its discretion the court struck all listed claims without leave to amend and granted no costs.

Court Disposition

Defendant/Respondent's motion granted; all listed claims/applications struck without leave to amend; no costs awarded

Orders

  • All of the claims/applications listed are struck without leave to amend
  • As no costs are requested, no costs are granted