• TURMEL: Court gives Crown 30 days to hop to Christian Berman's permit

    From John KingofthePaupers Turmel@1:229/2 to All on Sat Feb 23 14:57:19 2019
    From: johnturmel@gmail.com

    TURMEL: Court gives Crown 30 days to hop to Christian Berman's permit

    JCT: Richard Harton is helping Christian Berman get his
    permit.

    https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.fan.john-turmel/GdngeGP3G9o
    is my post: "Crown misses Response deadline for Christian
    Berman MedPot Permit."

    They didn't miss their deadline, they'd filed it on the
    wrong file number. The Crown repeats:

    On Aug 24 2018, Health Canada got his application for his
    marijuana permit.

    On Oct 18 2018, because there were still 4 licenses at the
    site, they sent a letter of intent to refuse.

    On Dec 12 2018, One of the other licenses filed an
    application to amend by moving.

    On Nov 30, after 3.5 months, he filed a Statement of Claim
    T-2060-18 in Montreal.

    On Dec 12 2018, H.C. granted the application to move.

    On Dec 20 2018, H.C. resumed its review of Berman's
    application.

    On Jan 21 2019, after 7 more weeks, he filed a Motion for an
    interim remedy of constitutional exemption.

    Judge Brown directed that:
    "The Defendant is to file a response by January 28,
    2019. The Plaintiff is to file a reply by February 5,
    2019."

    On Jan 28, 2019, the Crown filed their response saying:
    Health Canada had became aware of information that
    suggests the Plaintiff's registration may pose a risk to
    public health and safety and anticipates a decision in
    the coming weeks.

    Christian filed a Reply on Feb 5:

    Christian Berman

    Feb 5 2019

    VIA EMAIL

    Federal Court Registry
    180 Queen St. W. #200
    Toronto Ontario M5V 3L6

    Dear Sir/Madam:

    Re: Berman v. HMTQ No.: T-2060-18

    Further to the Direction of Case-Management Judge Brown
    dated Jan 22 2019, please accept this letter as the Reply of
    the Applicant for interim relief.

    Applicant applied to grow marijuana for medical purposes on
    August 24 2018 while the proposed site was still occupied by
    4 other licensees.

    On Oct 18 2018, the Ministry issued a Notice of Intent to
    Refuse.

    On Dec 12 2018, the Ministry received an amendment
    application to move from one of the other licensees.

    On Dec 20 2018, the review of the plaintiff's application
    was resumed.

    Health Canada is now reviewing information that suggests
    plaintiff's registration "may pose a risk to public health
    and safety."

    Health Canada has had the application for 18 weeks since
    August 24 2018 and it is now 7 weeks since the resumption of
    the review on the undefined suspicion of risk.

    Defendant states:
    Plaintiff has not established that he is entitled to the
    registration certificate, such that there is no legal
    duty to issue the registration.

    Plaintiff is seeking interlocutory recognition of a right
    not currently enjoyed" after Plaintiff's doctor established
    that he is entitled to the registration certificate and the
    Defendant has failed to establish that he is not.

    Defendant has had 18 weeks to find and detail a risk to
    public health in order to issue an intent to refuse. When it
    cannot define that risk for the court after 7 more weeks of
    research, Applicant therefore still seeks interim remedy
    despite Health Canada's undefined risk.

    That Health Canada has the wherewithal to determine that
    there were 4 licenses at the site but has delayed the
    applications of other plaintiffs until they proved that
    there were not over four when we now see Health Canada could
    have checked themselves all along does indicate the
    possibility of another bad faith excuse to stall.
    Dated at Montreal on Feb 5 2019.
    _________________________
    Christian Berman
    CC: Wendy Wright
    For the Respondent/Defendant

    As done by previous plaintiffs whom judge Brown allowed to
    do service by email, Richard got an okay from Jon Bricker to
    submit as an Acknowledgment of Service::

    From: Bricker, Jon <Jon.Bricker@justice.gc.ca>
    Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2019 1:48:12 PM
    To: 'Christian Berman'
    Cc: Wright, Wendy
    Subject: RE: T2060-18

    M. Berman -
    I confirm receipt of your Reply materials.
    However, please note that it is your responsibility to
    file the Reply with the Court, with proof of service. My
    client will not be filing this on your behalf.
    Sincerely,
    Jon Bricker Legal Counsel | Avocat


    JCT: As well, Richard filed a letter to the court
    administrator asking that Judge Brown be asked for a
    Direction granting that as proof of service which he has
    done for others. (without having to get it notarized.)

    On Feb 6, Her Majesty the Clerk wrote:

    From: Drouin, Justine <Justine.Drouin@cas-satj.gc.ca>
    Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2019 9:10:13 AM
    To: 'christian.berman@hotmail.com'
    Subject: T-2060-18 - Reply filed via e-filing
    Good morning Mr. Berman:
    I am in possession of the Reply you filed via the e-
    filing portal.
    Kindly provide the Registry with proof of service on the
    Respondent at your earliest convenience.
    Best regards,
    Justine Drouin
    Registry Officer | Agent du greffe

    So she was sent a reply:

    Le 6 fevr. 2019 a 09:54,
    Christian Berman <christian.berman@hotmail.com> a ecrit:

    Justine Drouin

    Le Case-Management Juge Brown a permit la signification
    par courriel de ces requetes.
    (Case Management Judge Brown has permitted service by
    email of these motions.)

    Ma lettre "metadataletter.pdf" est une demande au juge
    d'accepter la preuve de signification par courriel.
    (My letter "metadataletter.pdf" is a request to the
    judge to accept the service by email.

    Ce n'est pas a vous de rejeter ma demande. C'est au
    juge. SVP, passez ma letter demandant d'accepte la
    signification par courriel au juge Brown pour sa
    direction.
    (It is not up to you to reject my request. It's up to
    the judge. Please pass my letter asking to have the
    emailled service accepted by Judge Brown for his
    Direction.

    JCT: His Court file notes that it was sent to the judge.

    http://johnturmel.com/delberj.pdf is Judge Brown's Feb 21
    2019 Order. In it, it rules:

    AND UPON considering that Health Canada has not provided
    a timeline for its investigation;
    AND UPON concluding that the Applicant's motion if it is
    to succeed at all is at this time premature but that the
    Plaintiff should have the right to reapply if the
    Defendant does not make a decision whether to issue a
    permit or a Notice of Intent to refuse within 30 days of
    the date of this Order;
    THEREFORE THIS COURT ORDERS that the Plaintiff's motion
    be and the same is hereby dismissed, with leave to the
    Plaintiff to reapply if the Defendant does not make a
    decision whether to issue a permit or a Notice of Intent
    to refuse within 30 days of the date of this Order.
    Henry S.Brown, Judge

    JCT: Always appreciated that the Judge doesn't hit the
    patient Plaintiffs with costs!

    So he'll get his permit by March 21 2019 or Health Canada
    will have to come up with good reasons why Plaintiff's
    registration may pose a risk to public health and safety!

    You can bet he'll be re-applying on March 22 if they don't
    hop to it.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)