R. v. Enns

R. v. Enns

Applying Vukelich and related authority, the court found the defence met the low threshold to justify a s.7 Charter voir dire because the combined will-says and proposed expert evidence provided a reasonably possible basis that s.5 CDSA and the ACMPR may infringe liberty and security of medical cannabis users; therefore the voir dire was permitted subject to case management directions.

Citation
2019 NSSC 207
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Defendant: Christopher Enns
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
11 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Charter Challenge / Pre Trial Vukelich Application (voir Dire Permission)
Outcome
Defence permitted to proceed to a s.7 Charter voir dire on constitutionality of s.5 CDSA and the ACMPR
Legal Topics
Section 5 CDSA, Access to Cannabis for Medical Purposes Regulations (acmpr), Section 7 Charter (liberty and Security), Vukelich Voir Dire Threshold, Expert Evidence Admissibility
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Administrative Law Health Law Section 5 CDSA Access to Cannabis for Medical Purposes Regulations (acmpr) Section 7 Charter (liberty and Security) Vukelich Voir Dire Threshold +1 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 4 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Christopher Enns

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Charter Challenge / Pre Trial Vukelich Application (voir Dire Permission)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether s.5(2) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act infringes s.7 Charter rights of medical cannabis users
  2. 2 Whether the ACMPR restricted access to medical cannabis such that s.7 is engaged
  3. 3 Whether the defence satisfied the low threshold to obtain a Vukelich voir dire

Ratio Decidendi

Applying Vukelich and related authority, the court found the defence met the low threshold to justify a s.7 Charter voir dire because the combined will-says and proposed expert evidence provided a reasonably possible basis that s.5 CDSA and the ACMPR may infringe liberty and security of medical cannabis users; therefore the voir dire was permitted subject to case management directions.

Court Disposition

Defence permitted to proceed to a s.7 Charter voir dire on constitutionality of s.5 CDSA and the ACMPR

Orders

  • Defence permitted a voir dire to argue that s.5 of the CDSA and the ACMPR infringe s.7 Charter rights of liberty and security of the person of medical cannabis users
  • Defence to provide a detailed daily schedule of witnesses for the proposed 12-day voir dire to the court within 14 days of release of this decision