PRACTICE |
Mootness |
Paquette v. Canada (Attorney General)
A-470-02
2003 FCA 327, Létourneau J.A.
5/9/03
3 pp.
Moot point--Appeal from Trial Division judgment ([2002] F.C.J. No. 1021 (QL)) dismissing application for judicial review on ground issue had become moot--Appeal dismissed--Appellant suffering from serious illnesses and on March 12, 2001 granted exemption (allowing him to have, produce and grow cannabis for medicinal purposes and personal use) exempting him from application of Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, ss. 4, 7--Appellant challenged ministerial decision by judicial review as to quantity of cannabis authorized to produce and have in his possession--On June 12, Minister replaced exemption of March 12, 2001 by new exemption expiring on September 11, 2001--Since that time, discretionary power of Act, s. 56 defined in Marijuana Medical Access Regulations--These Regulations now legal basis for granting exemptions on medical grounds--As exemption of March 12 no longer in effect and disputed conditions have changed, issue has become moot--Further, validity of Regulations successfully challenged in Ontario Superior Court (Hitzig v. Canada (2003), 171 C.C.C. (3d) 18) and case now under advisement in Court of Appeal of that province (appeal dismissed ((2003), 14 C.R. (6th) 1)--This new legal and judicial situation concerning new system for granting exemptions means no real public interest in deciding issue involving exemption which is both obsolete and based on outdated legal foundation-- Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, S.C. 1996, c. 19, ss. 4, 7, 56--Marijuana Medical Access Regulations, SOR/2001-227.