From: johnturmel@yahoo.com   
      
   JCT: The Crown wrote Justice Brown to say they got Heidi her   
   permit and her motion for interim relief is now mooted.   
   Judge asked for her reply. There is only one reason he   
   didn't dismiss it as mooted. The Crown asked to make Heidi   
   pay them for their defence of her motion!   
      
   File No: T-144-18   
                           FEDERAL COURT   
      
   BETWEEN:   
                          Heidi Chartrand   
                                                   Applicant   
                                and   
                     Attorney General of Canada   
                                                  Respondent   
      
             APPLICANT'S REPLY TO DELIVERY OF REMEDY   
      
   1. The Defendant has advised the Court that subsequent to the   
   filing of Canada's responding motion record, Health Canada   
   completed its review of the plaintiff's application for   
   registration to produce cannabis for her personal medical use,   
   and granted the application confirming her registration has   
   been sent to the plaintiff via Express Post.   
      
   2. Even though the Registration isn't for the full term of the   
   prescription, since that claim continues in the action,   
   Applicant must agree that the motion for interim relief has   
   been mooted by the partial relief provided.   
      
   3. The only outstanding issue is the costs for Plaintiff's   
   motion deemed "frivolous and vexatious" by the Defendant.   
      
   4. Twice, the Defendant noted the Plaintiff had refused to   
   wait. She did not wait to file a first motion for interim   
   relief before she became an outlaw and then did not wait to   
   file her next motion a week after she became such outlaw.   
   Though the first motion was dismissed as premature, the   
   Applicant had good reasons for filing the second motion after   
   waiting another week.   
      
   5. In the pleadings, the statement of Health Canada's Dr.   
   Stephane Lessard is cited as boasting applications were   
   processed "in under 4 weeks and renewals, far less," Lead   
   Plaintiff Jeff Harris and wife each were renewed in 2 weeks   
   under the MMAR. So the Defendant was aware that many Renewal   
   Applicants past 2 weeks delay were being urged to file for   
   interim relief. After dismissal of the first motion, the   
   Defendant Health Canada had another full week to get it   
   processed before Plaintiff filed again once the MMAR standard   
   had not been met on the 15th day.   
      
   6. Since most patients file well in advance, Plaintiff's   
   request for urgent processing had to be a rarity. Ray Turmel   
   applied to renew 7 weeks in advance and needed a motion to   
   have it issued half-an-hour before expiry. His wife Denise   
   Beaudoin applied to renew 13 weeks in advance and received it   
   the day after a motion was filed. Tony and Nicole Van Edig   
   applied to renew 10 weeks in advance and needed a motion to   
   get it 2 days before expiry date. Robert McAmmond applied 15   
   weeks in advance and needed a motion to get it a week after   
   expiry. Terry Johnsgaard applied the minimum 6 weeks in   
   advance and needed a motion to get it renewed 3 days after   
   expiry. So even if Plaintiff had not been an urgent request,   
   there is the great probability that a motion would have had to   
   have been brought anyway, whether an urgent request or filed   
   well in advance. The only difference being that time lost by   
   back-dating to when the doctor signed. Denise Beaudoin lost 13   
   weeks, Robert McAmmond 15 weeks, Tony & Nicole Van Edig 10   
   weeks and Terry Johnsgaard lost 6 weeks. Applicant lost 3.   
      
   7. Before filing the second motion, Plaintiff checked with   
   Health Canada to find she was not yet in the system. Still   
   stuck in the mail-room while she would have been renewed under   
   the MMAR. Without the second motion, Plaintiff might still be   
   waiting rather than resulting in record-setting processing   
   time.   
      
   8. Applicant has already suffered enough. Ray Turmel, Denise   
   Beaudoin, Tony and Nicole Van Edig could have suffered what   
   Robert McAmmond, Terry Johnsgaard and Heidi Chartrand actually   
   suffered when Health Canada let their registrations expire   
   after 15 weeks, 6 weeks, 8 days. It caused Plaintiff herein to   
   suffer:   
      
   a) interruption in production costing a minimum of 3 less   
   weeks of product over the year at the daily dosage. Had Health   
   Canada had the staff to process the renewal expeditiously,   
   Plaintiff would have had 3 more weeks worth of product by the   
   end of year.   
      
   b) stress from being an outlaw facing:   
   i) life-sentence imprisonment with a large once-legal stash to   
   hide;   
   ii) fines for getting caught following her doctor's   
   authorization without bureaucratic registration.   
      
   9. The evidence shows that Health Canada does not have the   
   staff to deal with rush requests because they do not even have   
   the staff to deal with the "well-in-advance" requests. And we   
   know renewals with no changes other than a new doctor letter   
   can be processed in hours or days!   
      
   10. So Mr. McGuire informs a rare rush job request that she'd   
   have to wait and suffer normal procedures like everyone else!   
   With insufficient staff for normal procedures to allow for   
   expedition in case of expiry looming, suffer expiry and wait,   
   is shown by the insufficient staff to process on-time   
   renewals. The whole under-staffing woes being suffered by   
   Plaintiff are all the Defendant's fault.   
      
   11. Plaintiff submits that no motion or action would have been   
   necessary had Health Canada had sufficient staff! When the   
   Defendant can comply in short order with the relief requested   
   in the motion, such motion is not frivolous nor vexatious and   
   Plaintiff should not be punished with costs for having   
   compelled the Defendant to correct its dereliction through the   
   courts. Pleas by patients for relief from the effects of   
   short-staffing should not be punished with costs when   
   successful.   
   Dated at Halifax on Feb 22, 2018.   
   Heidi Chartrand   
      
   JCT: So Justice Brown's only decision is whether to make Heidi   
   pay Health Canada for having prodded them along. It would be   
   wonderful if he found some way to make them pay her the $250   
   for her time and expenses, after she suffers due to their   
   understaffing.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)