Canada (Attorney General) v. PHS Community Services Society

Canada (Attorney General) v. PHS Community Services Society

The CDSA prohibitions are a valid exercise of the federal criminal law power and apply to Insite, but the Minister’s refusal to grant a s.56 exemption in the circumstances was arbitrary and grossly disproportionate and thus violated s.7; accordingly the Minister must grant a s.56 exemption to Insite forthwith.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2011 SCC 44
Parties
Appellants/respondents on Cross Appeal: Attorney General of Canada and Minister of Health for Canada; Respondent: PHS Community Services Society; Respondent: Dean Edward Wilson; Respondent: Shelly Tomic; Respondent: Attorney General of British Columbia; Respondent/appellant on Cross Appeal: Vancouver Area Network of Drug Users (VANDU)
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
30 September 2011
Procedural Posture
Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada (constitutional and Charter Challenge) / Judgment on Appeal From British Columbia Court of Appeal After Summary Trial at BC Supreme Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; cross-appeal dismissed; Minister of Health ordered to grant s.56 exemption to Insite forthwith
Legal Topics
Division of Powers, Interjurisdictional Immunity, Section 7 Charter (life, Liberty, Security), Ministerial Discretion Under S.56 CDSA, Remedies Under S.24(1) (mandamus), Federal Paramountcy
Source Language
english
Constitutional Law Criminal Law Health Law Administrative Law Charter Law Division of Powers Interjurisdictional Immunity Section 7 Charter (life, Liberty, Security) +3 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Attorney General of Canada and Minister of Health for Canada

Appellants/respondents on Cross Appeal

PHS Community Services Society

Respondent

Dean Edward Wilson

Respondent

Shelly Tomic

Respondent

Attorney General of British Columbia

Respondent

Vancouver Area Network of Drug Users (VANDU)

Respondent/appellant on Cross Appeal

Procedural Posture

Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada (constitutional and Charter Challenge) / Judgment on Appeal From British Columbia Court of Appeal After Summary Trial at BC Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether CDSA ss.4(1) and 5(1) are constitutionally inapplicable to Insite under division of powers
  2. 2 Whether ss.4(1) and 5(1) of the CDSA infringe s.7 Charter rights of life, liberty and security of the person
  3. 3 Whether the Minister of Health’s refusal to grant a s.56 exemption violated s.7 and principles of fundamental justice

Ratio Decidendi

The CDSA prohibitions are a valid exercise of the federal criminal law power and apply to Insite, but the Minister’s refusal to grant a s.56 exemption in the circumstances was arbitrary and grossly disproportionate and thus violated s.7; accordingly the Minister must grant a s.56 exemption to Insite forthwith.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; cross-appeal dismissed; Minister of Health ordered to grant s.56 exemption to Insite forthwith

Orders

  • Minister of Health must grant an exemption to PHS Community Services Society (Insite) under s.56 of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act forthwith
  • Appeal dismissed with costs to respondents; cross-appeal dismissed without costs