TURMEL: I'm at Kiosk 605 at Montreal Cannabis Convention Saturday
JCT: I've been invited to attend the Montreal Cannabis
Convention at Place Bonaventure on Saturday by the Canadian
Cannabis Association http://associationcannabis.ca
I'll be announcing the templates for our Federal Court kits
looking for people who might want
a) damages for the delay,
b) join Jeff Harris in getting 10-day supply over 150 grams
c) seek to strike the prohibitions to get juice,
d) seek to strike the caps on 2 patients/grower and 4
e) seek to strike the 1-year limit for those with permanent
illnesses and announce the remaining torts I'd like to
challenge. Remember, our original Gold Star challenge listed
20 different problems violating our rights but Justice
Phelan said he'd fixed them all in his Allard decision. Har
har har har har har. Fat chance since we're still
complaining about them now, so how could he have fixed them?
His cheap dismissal now comes back haunt him. From our
Statement of Claim:
ORIGINAL GOLD STAR TORTS
UNDER ALL THREE MMAR, MMPR, ACMPR REGIMES
16. The following constitutional violations are alleged
under the 3 MMAR, MMPR, and ACMPR exemption regimes which
unreasonably restrict access and/or supply:
1) MMAR S.4(2)(b); MMPR S.119 and ACMPR S.8(1) require a
medical document from recalcitrant or not-available family
2) The three regimes failed to provide DIN (Drug
Identification Number) for affordability and insurance
3) MMAR S.13(1), S.33(1), s42(1)(a); MMPR S.129(2)(a) and
ACMPR S.8(2) require annual renewals for permanent diseases
and then short-change them on the year.
4) MMAR S.65(1); MMPR and ACMPR S.199(1)&(2), S.200(1)&(2)
compel exemptees to destroy unused cannabis before receipt
of new batch with no refund.
5) MMAR S12.(1)(b), S.32(c), S.62(2)(c), S.63(2)(f); MMPR
S.117(1)(c) and ACMPR S.43(1), S.46(1), S.184(d) allow the
Ministry to revoke the patient's permits for non-medical
6) MMAR, MMPR and ACMPR fail to exempt patients from the
CDSA S.5(1) prohibition on trafficking for trading and
sampling different strains for different pains and gains in
7) MMAR, MMPR, ACMPR fail to exempt transformers of
marijuana to edibles and oils the prohibition on which was
ruled unconstitutional in R. v. Smith  by the Supreme
8) Industrial Hemp Regulations SOR/98-156 CDSA stifles hemp
production by defining "industrial hemp" as not containing
more than 0.3% THC w/w.
UNDER THE MMAR AND ACMPR
17. The following constitutional violations are alleged
under the only the MMAR and ACMPR exemption regimes:
9) MMAR S.32(e) and ACMPR S.184(b) prohibit more than 2
10) MMAR S.32(d) & S.63(1) and ACMPR S.184(c) prohibit more
than 4 licenses/site.
11) MMAR S.30(1) and ACMPR S.190 limits the number of plants
ensuring no seasonal economies nor respite from constant
12) MMAR and ACMPR fail to license any garden help.
13) MMAR S.35(b), S.37(2d), S.39(1c) and ACMPR S.174(3)(a),
S.176(2)(a), S.177(4)(a) make a Registered Person or
Designated Person ineligible for a production license if
they have been convicted of a "designated cannabis offence"
within the preceding 10 years.
14) Under both regimes with personal production, Health
Canada takes time to make intimidating phone calls to
doctors trying to convince them to reduce their
prescriptions and complaints to the doctor's association to
pass along to the doctor! No problem when buying from an
15) Applications to produce took 4 weeks under the MMAR and
now take up to 30 weeks under the ACMPR. Applications to
renew took far less under the MMAR but take up to 16 weeks
under the ACMPR. Applications to amend took under 4 weeks
under the MMAR and now take up to 13 weeks under the ACMPR.
UNDER THE MMPR AND ACMPR
18. The following constitutional violations are alleged
under the MMPR and ACMPR exemption regimes:
16) MMPR S.117(1)(c)(i): "The Licensed Producer must cancel
if there are reasonable grounds to believe that false
information has been submitted;"
ACMPR S.117(2): "must cancel without delay if LP has
verified the existence of the ground in a "reasonable
ACMPR S.117(3): "has reasonable grounds that a ground
17) MMPR S.117(4) and ACMPR S.139(3) let Licensed Producers
cancel patient's registration for undefined "business
18) MMPR S.117(7), S.118 and ACMPR S.139(7) prohibit the
Licensed Producer from returning or transferring the medical
document back to the patient;
19) MMPR 20) S.5(c), S.73(1)(e), S.123(1)(e), S.130(2) and
ACMPR S.6(1)(d), S.178(2)(f)(ii), S.189(1)(e) prohibit
possession or delivery of more than 30-days or 150 grams.
9) & 10) Strike caps on patients and licenses insdg.pdf
3) Strike 1-year limit insyear.pdf
14) Damages for harassing calls (coming inshar.pdf)
5) prohibit ministry from revoking on non-medical reasons
7) Exempt transformers
11) Strike 5 plants/gram limit
12) Strike no help allowed
13) Strike 10-year ban on those with criminal records
16) Strike LPs cancelling registrations
17) Strike LPs cancelling registrations for business reasons
18) Strike no return of medical document if they do.
1) Strike need for doctors
JCT: Gee, that's quite a few that Justice Phelan's Allard
decision did not solve even if he said he had! Har har hasr
har har har.
NEW) Strike 4 plants per residence for adults
5 TORTS DONE, 11 MORE TO COME
Since the Statement of Claim files are labelled by the tort,
it should be easy for Judge Brown to keep them separate!
So I'll be offering to help people file their claims for the
various templates that are ready. I'm particularly hoping
for more people complaining about the 150 gram limit who
file before Tuesday to get in on the Jeff Harris hearing on
Oct 30 and for those who want to strike the prohibitions
preventing them from getting juice. It would be nice to
strike the prohibitions once and for all. It is the one tort
they cannot fix.