n;Megan Marrie has recently
been admitted as partner at
Shibley Righton LLP. Marrie main-
tains a litigation practice with a
focus on professional liability,
construction law, education law,
commercial litigation and condo-
minium law. She has significant
advocacy experience, and has
represented clients before
administrative tribunals and all
levels of court in Ontario.
Marijuana
Continued From Page 1
Canada’s Best Workplaces by
the Great Place to Work Insti-
tute. Gardiner Roberts is the only
legal services firm to be named
to the list.
against marijuana production and
possession in the Controlled Drugs
and Substances Act—although the
declaration of invalidity has been
put on hold, while the case is
before the Court of Appeal.
“The combined effect of the
CDSA and the MMAR is to make
sick people sicker,” said Toronto
lawyer Paul Lewin, who repre-
sents Mernagh.
The federal Crown meanwhile,
is arguing that the findings of
Justice Taliano lacked an eviden-
tiary foundation. “He relied on
inadmissible evidence, misappre-
hended the legal effect of amend-
ments that were made to the
MMAR, substituted his own
opinions for those of the treating
physicians, and engaged in
speculation,” says Crown attorney
Croft Michaelson, in written
arguments filed with the court.
“There was simply no basis to
conclude that medical practition-
ers in Canada had acted in any
manner other than the best inter-
ests of their patient,” he adds.
The MMAR requires appli-
cants to obtain a signed declara-
tion from a doctor, before they
can receive government author-
ization for medical use.
After a constitutional challenge to the scheme in 2003,
certain conditions in the MMAR
were relaxed so that doctors were
no longer required to recommend a daily dosage of marijuana
for patients or indicate that the
benefits of such a treatment outweighed the risks.
But Mernagh—who uses marijuana to treat his symptoms from
fibromyalgia, scoliosis and seizures—argued in court that the
revised regulations remain illusory, saying he has been unable to
find any doctor willing to sign a
medical marijuana declaration.
He was therefore precluded from
accessing the drug legally, Mernagh argues.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
n;Ken Bailey of Pinckard Bailey
Professional Corporation will join
Barriston LLP as a partner,
strengthening the firm’s cor-
porate, commercial and real
estate practice. With offices
located in Huntsville and Hali-
burton Village, Bailey’s general
practice serves corporate, com-
mercial and real estate clients
including land developers with
varied development interests that
include fractional ownership pro-
jects and resort developments.
The mini-merger will allow Bar-
riston to continue to grow stra-
tegically within the region.
n;TechLaw Group Inc., an inter-
national network of law firms
dedicated to enhancing the prac-
tice of technology law, recently
announced the appointment of
its executive board members for
2012-2013. Craig Thorburn of
Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP
was named TechLaw president.
Thorburn specializes in mergers
and acquisitions, with a focus
on technology companies.
TechLaw has grown to include
19 law firms with more than
7,500 lawyers and offices in
more than 28 countries.
AWARDS
n;For the fourth consecutive
year, Gardiner Roberts LLP has
been named to the 2012 list of
THE LAWYERS WEEKLY
Justice Taliano noted: “The
physicians of Canada have mas-
sively boycotted the MMAR and
VOL. 22, NO. 27 NEWS FOR THE LEGAL PROFESSION DECEMBER 6, 2002
MEDICAL MARIJUANA IN CANADA
JULY 2000
R v. Parker
Ontario Court of Appeal declares
prohibition on marijuana
possession in the invalid because
it does not provide a source for
medical users. The declaration is
suspended for 12 months.
JULY 2001
The federal government introduces
the Marijuana Medical Access
Regulations (MMAR). It permits
people receiving government
approval to possess and grow
cannabis for medical use, under
strict regulations. Prairie Plant
Systems also receives a government
contract to grow for approved users.
JULY 2008
Sfetkopolous v. Canada
The Federal Court of Canada
strikes down some of the
amended provisions because the
restraint on access is not in
accordance with the principles of
fundamental justice.
MMAR will be changed to allow
approved producers to provide
cannabis for up to two users,
instead of one.
JANUARY 2010
Supreme Court denies the federal
government leave to appeal in
Beren and Swallow.
OCTOBER 2003
Hitzig v. Canada
Parts of the MMAR are struck down
by the Ontario Court of Appeal as
unconstitutional, because
restrictions that limit approved
producers to growing for no more
than one person, forces users to
access the black market.
DECEMBER 2003
The federal government amends the
MMAR with provisions virtually
identical to those struck down in Hitzig.
FEBRUARY 2009
R v. Beren and Swallow
Provisions restricting authorized
producers from growing in common
with more than two other
producers under the MMAR are
also struck down.
APRIL 2009
The Supreme Court of Canada
denies the federal government
leave to appeal in Sfetkopolous.
MAY 2009
Health Canada announces that the
MARCH 2010
Federal government issues new
MMAR regulations to restrict the
number of production licence
holders on any one site, to four.
APRIL 2011
R v. Mernagh
An Ontario Superior Court judge
strikes down the MMAR because of
evidence that doctors are refusing
to sign documents needed for an
applicant to become an approved
medical user.
their overwhelming refusal to
participate in the medicinal
marihuana program completely
undermines the effectiveness of
the program .”
The Crown says the judge
erred on a number of fronts, cit-
ing no evidence of a “massive
boycott.” It stated that between
1998 and 2010, the annual num-
ber of doctors who signed med-
ical marijuana declarations rose
to more than 2,000 from fewer
than 10.
The judge’s suggestion that
physicians were failing to meet
the legitimate demands for med-
ical marijuana was additionally
problematic, Michaelson wrote,
because there was no evidence
adduced at trial to determine
how many Canadians had a valid
medical need for the drug.
EPICSTOCK | DREAMSTIME.COM
ledgeable with this unapproved
plant therapy,” said Lewin. “They’re
not comfortable dealing with the
potential legal repercussions.”
“The doctor-as-gatekeeper idea
has been a bad fit from day one…
and from day one the government
has denied there was a problem,”
Lewin’s responding factum states,
noting some doctors became “hos-
tile” or discontinued treatment
when patients requested a mari-
juana declaration.
There are other ways to regulate marijuana use, such as creating a registry of doctors educated
about marijuana where patients
can turn for a prescription,
Lewin suggested. n
Publisher
Julie Murtha
Editor In Chief
Rob Kelly
Senior Editor
Shannon Kari
Focus Editor
Matthew Grace, LL.B.
Ottawa Bureau Chief
Cristin Schmitz
Art Director
Tammy Leung
Production Coordinator
Pauline Braithwaite
Interns
Karen Alexiou & Anum Lateef
Correspondents
Luigi Benetton, Toronto
Arnold Ceballos, LL.B., Toronto
Thomas Claridge, Toronto
Christopher Guly, Ottawa
Jeremy Hainsworth, Vancouver
Geoff Kirbyson, Winnipeg
Luis Millan, Montreal
donalee Moulton, Halifax
Mike Sadava, Edmonton
® THE LAWYERS WEEKLY
VOL. 22, NO. 27 NE WS FOR THE LEGAL PROFESSION DECEMBER 6, 2002
THE LAWYERS WEEKLY
Vol. 22, No. 27 NEWS FOR THE LEGAL PROFESSION December 6, 2002
THE LAWYERS WEEKLY
VOL. 22, NO. 27 NEWS FOR THE LEGAL PROFESSION DECEMBER 6, 2002
VOL. 22, NO. 27 NEWS FOR THE LEGAL PROFESSION DECEMBER 6, 2002
ADVERTISING
Advertising Sales
Jim Grice (905) 415–5807
Circulation Controller
Scott Welsh (905) 479–2665, ext. 324
HOW TO REACH US
Phone: (905) 479–2665
Toll-free: 1–800–668–6481
Fax: (905) 479–3758
Email: comments@lawyersweekly.ca
Main Office
123 Commerce Valley Drive East
Suite 700, Markham, ON L3T 7W8
Phone: (905) 479–2665
Ottawa Bureau
c/o Parliamentary Press Gallery
Rm 350-N, Centre Block
Parliament Hill, Ottawa, ON K1A 0A6
Phone: (613) 820–2794
Fax: (613) 995–5795
Website: www.lawyersweekly.ca
Member, Ontario Press Council
2 Carlton Street, Suite 1706, Toronto, ON
(416) 340–1981; Fax: (416) 340–8724
Postal Information: Please forward all
postal returns to: Circulation Controller, The
Lawyers Weekly, 123 Commerce Valley Drive
East, Suite 700, Markham, ON L3T 7W8.
Return postage guaranteed. ISSN 0830-
0151. Publications Mail Sales Agreement
Number: 40065517.
SUBSCRIPTION RATES
1 year (48 issues): $278, plus tax
2 years (96 issues): $474, plus tax
U.S. and international subscriptions: $386/year
Law student rate: $64, plus tax
Individual copies: $12, plus tax
Digital Subscription Rates:
1 year (48 issues) $252, plus tax
2 years (96 issues) $428, plus tax
US / Int’l subscriptions: $345/year
Law student rate: $58, plus tax
GST/HST/QST No.: R121051767
COPYRIGHT/TRADEMARK
The Lawyers Weekly is published on Fridays,
48 times a year, by LexisNexis Canada Inc.,
123 Commerce Valley Drive East, Suite 700,
Markham, ON L3T 7W8. All rights reserved.
No part of this publication may be reproduced in any
material form (including photocopying or storing it in
any medium by electronic means and whether or not
transiently or incidentally to some other use of this
publication) without the written permission of the
copyright owner, except in accordance with the
provisions of the Copyright Act. The Lawyers Weekly
is a registered trademark of LexisNexis Canada Inc.
