From: johnturmel@yahoo.com   
      
   JCT: People who waited months for medpot grow permits filed   
   Statements of Claim that the long processing time for meds   
   violated their Right to Life. Here's the Crown's case that   
   they have no right to complain with a first draft of the   
   Reply.   
      
   Crown: Wendy Wright.   
      
              MEMORANDUM OF FACT AND LAW OF THE MOVING   
                PARTY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA   
      
   CR: PART I - STATEMENT OF FACTS   
      
   A. OVERVIEW   
      
   1. This proceeding seeks a declaration that the delay in   
   processing time for an Access to Cannabis for Medical Purposes   
   Regulations ("ACMPR") Production Permit is a violation of the   
   Plaintiffs s. 7 Charter right to life. The action also seeks   
   damages pursuant to s. 24 of the Charter for the allegedly   
   unconstitutional processing times for the ACMPR Production   
   Permits. The claim fails to provide any adjudicative facts   
   upon which the Plaintiff could make out his claim for a s. 7   
   violation or Charter damages. As such it is plain and obvious   
   that this claim should be struck.   
      
   JCT: It took XX weeks when it used to take 4. What more do   
   they need? See how many times they say insufficient facts.   
      
   CR: B. STATUTORY FRAMEWORK   
   2. In 2016, the Government enacted the Access to Cannabis for   
   Medical Purposes Regulations ("ACMPR"). Under the ACMPR,   
   patients with the support of an authorized healthcare   
   practitioner may access cannabis in either of three ways: (1)   
   by purchasing cannabis or cannabis oil from a commercial   
   Licensed Producer ("Licensed Producer'"); (2) by registering   
   with Health Canada to produce cannabis for the patient's own   
   personal use; or (3) by registering with Health Canada and   
   designating another person to produce cannabis on the   
   patient's behalf. In addition, individuals who feel that the   
   ACMPR do not meet their unique needs may continue to apply to   
   the Minister of Health under section 56 of the CDSA for a   
   discretionary exemption to recognize their specific   
   circumstances.   
      
        a) Personal and designated production   
      
   3. Patients who wish to produce cannabis for their own   
   personal use must obtain the approval of a healthcare   
   practitioner and register with Health Canada to either   
   personally produce cannabis or to have another designated   
   person produce cannabis on their behalf.   
      
   4. Patients wishing to personally produce cannabis, or to   
   designate another person to produce for them, must submit an   
   application with basic information including the patient's   
   name and date of birth; residential, production and storage   
   site addresses; whether the cannabis production will lake   
   place indoors or outdoors; the consent of the property owner;   
   and signed declarations that the individual and, if   
   applicable; the designated producer; will take all necessary   
   measures to ensure the security of the cannabis and, in the   
   case of outdoor production, that the proposed site is not   
   adjacent to a school, playground, daycare or other public   
   space frequently mainly be persons under 18.5 Personal and   
   designated producers must not have been convicted of certain   
   relevant offences in the last 10 years.6   
      
   5. Applicants who have registered but whose cannabis supply is   
   not yet ready for cultivation, may also obtain an interim   
   supply of cannabis from a Licensed Producer.7 A patient whose   
   application for a registration certificate is pending may also   
   obtain cannabis from a commercial Licensed Producer by using a   
   separate medical document, signed by the patient's health care   
   practitioner,8   
      
   JCT: Getting another original?   
      
   CR: C. THE "TURMEL KIT" CLAIMS   
      
   6. Since August 2017, more than 28 self-represented Plaintiffs   
   have filed virtually identical claims at Federal Court   
   Registry offices in Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba,   
   Ontario, Quebec, and Saskatchewan.9 The claims, which are   
   based on ''kits" downloaded from the website of John Turmel10   
   (and which are accordingly hereinafter referred to as the   
   "Turmel Kit" claims), seek declarations that the "long   
   processing time for Access to Cannabis for Medical Purposes   
   Regulations ("ACMPR") Production Permits is an unconscionable   
   violation of the Plaintiffs' s. 7 Charter Right to Life"'.11   
   The claims also seek damages pursuant to s. 24 of the Charter   
   for the alleged processing delays.12   
      
   7. In Orders dated October 5, 6, 24, November 30, and December   
   7, 2017 the Court ordered that these claims were to proceed as   
   a specially managed proceedings.13   
      
   8, In Orders dated October 30, November 20,28 & 30, December   
   7,2017, the Chief Justice assigned the. claims to His Honour   
   Justice Henry Brown for Case Management.14   
      
   9. On November 24,20 17, the Honourable Justice Brown ordered,   
   among other things that the current file (T-1379-17) was   
   designated as lead case and actions T-1324-17, T-1370-17, T-   
   1375-17, T-1380-17 and T-1425-17 would be held in abeyance   
   with no further proceedings permitted without leave of the   
   Court pending the determination of the lead case. His Honour   
   Justice Brown also held that determinations made in the lead   
   case would be used to determine the remaining actions. Justice   
   Brown also set a timetable for this motion.15   
      
   10. On December 11 2017, Justice Brown ordered, among other   
   things, that the current file (T4379-17) remained the lead   
   case and actions T-1474-17, T-1478-17, T-1479-17, T-1499-17,   
   T-1500-17, T-1523-17, T-1524-17, T-1626-17, T-1654-17, T-1700-   
   17, T-1752-17, and T-1864-17 would be held in abeyance with no   
   further proceedings permitted without leave of the Court   
   pending the determination of the lead case. His Honour Justice   
   Brown also held that determinations made in the lead case   
   would be used to determine all of the remaining actions but T-   
   l654-17. The order confirmed that T-l 654-17 would proceed on   
   the same timetable as the rest of the actions.16   
      
   11. The December 11, 2017 Order also required that "all   
   actions   
   commenced in this Court before, on, or after the date of this   
   Order" that "are the same or substantially similar to T-1379-   
   17" would proceed as ordinary actions and be specially managed   
   in accordance with the December 11, 2017 Order, and all   
   subsequent Orders and Directions made in the lead case would   
   apply to the other case managed actions.   
      
   D. HARRIS'S 2014 CLAIM AND 2016 CLAIM   
      
   12. This is not the first time that the Plaintiff has filed a   
   statement of claim downloaded from the website of John Turmel   
   in this this Court. The Plaintiff was one of 316 self-   
   represented Plaintiffs who filed nearly identical statements   
   of claim also downloaded from the website www.johnturmel.com   
   in 2014.17 These claims sought declarations that the Marihuana   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)