Heidi Chartrand v. Her Majesty the Queen
(Federal Court) (Civil) (By Leave)
Constitutional law - Appeals, Judicial review, Civil procedure.
Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.
Constitutional law – Constitutional proceedings – Appeals and judicial review – Civil procedure – Self represented litigants challenging constitutionality of medical marijuana regulations and seeking interim exemption from criminal law pending trial – Whether the applicants proved sufficient medical need to warrant exemption from marijuana prohibitions pending action for repeal – Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, S.C. 1996, c. 19.
Since February 2014, approximately 300 self-represented plaintiffs, including the applicant, have filed identical claims seeking declarations that the Marijuana Medical Access Regulations (“MMAR”), S.O.R./2001-227, which were repealed on March 31, 2014 and the Marijuana for Medical Purposes Regulations, S.O.R./2013-119, which succeeded the MMAR are unconstitutional. In the course of their actions, twenty-six plaintiffs, including the applicant, brought motions for interim constitutional exemptions from the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (“CDSA”) for the personal use of marijuana pending trial of their actions.
- Date modified: