From: johnturmel@gmail.com   
      
   JCT: Last post, I analyzed the Crown's Response to Art   
   Jackes' motion to have his appeal slated for hearing with   
   Allan J. Harris because his issue is covered in Harris.   
      
   The Crown also opposes Igor Mozajko's medpot appeal being   
   heard with Harris appeal too. Here are their Written   
   Representations:   
      
   Court File No.: A-339-18   
                     FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL   
   BETWEEN:   
                           IGOR MOZAJKO   
                                                     Respondent   
                                                Cross-Appellant   
                               and   
                      HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN   
                                                      Appellant   
                                     Respondent in Cross-Appeal   
      
            WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS OF THE RESPONDENT,   
             HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA   
      
   1. The appellant, Her Majesty The Queen in Right of Canada   
   ("Canada"), asks that the appellant's motion be dismissed.   
   The motion requests that this matter be heard together with   
   Allan J. Harris (A-258-18). However, the respondent has not   
   filed a memorandum of fact and law and must now bring a   
   motion for an extension of time to do so. If heard together   
   with the Harris appeal, these steps would delay the Harris   
   appeal and several federal court proceedings that are   
   currently stayed pending that appeal. However, should the   
   court relieve the respondent of the obligation to file a   
   memorandum, no extension of time is required and Canada   
   would not opposed the request that these matters be heard   
   together.   
      
   JCT: They ask that the motion to be heard together be   
   dismissed while they would not oppose them being heard   
   together! Har har har har har har.   
      
   CR: PART I - FACTS   
      
   A. THE UNDERLYING CLAIMS AND MOTIONS   
      
   2. Since Aug 2017, more than 250 plaintiffs have filed   
   largely identical claims in federal court. The claims are   
   based on a kit downloaded from the website of medical   
   cannabis activist John Turmel - allege that the processing   
   times for registration to produce cannabis for personal   
   medical use is unconstitutional. The claims are being   
   collectively case-managed in federal court by Justice J.   
   Brown who has designated Allan J. Harris (T-1379-17) (the   
   "Harris claim") as the lead claim among this group of   
   claims, and has stayed the other claims pending   
   determination of the Harris claim.   
      
   5. Canada filed a motion to strike the Harris claim for no   
   reasonable cause of action. Following the filing of Canada's   
   motion, the respondent in the present matter filed a claim,   
   the Igor Mozajko claim in addition to an allegation that the   
   registration processing time was unconstitutional. The   
   Mozajko claim included an allegation that Health Canada's   
   approach to calculating the period of registration was also   
   unconstitutional. As this allegation was not contained in   
   the original Harris, Brown J. directed Canada to file   
   supplemental materials if they wanted to strike the Mozajko   
   claim.   
      
   6. Canada filed a motion to strike the Mozajko claim as   
   directed. Following the filing of the motion, Mr. Harris   
   sought leave to amend his own claim to add the allegation   
   that the period of registration was unconstitutional. Judge   
   Brown J. granted leave to amend and granted Canada leave to   
   file an amended motion to strike the Harris claim.   
      
   7. In addition to Canada's motions to strike, more than 80   
   plaintiffs have filed their own motions for interim   
   exemptions from the criminal prohibitions on cannabis   
   possession and production pending the outcome of their   
   registration applications to Health Canada. In cases where   
   the plaintiff's registration application was only recently   
   submitted, Judge J. Brown declined to hear the motions. The   
   other motions have either been dismissed on their merit or   
   abandoned or dismissed as moot on the grounds that the   
   plaintiff registration was granted by Health Canada.   
      
   B. The Harris motion decision and appeals   
      
   8. By order and reason dated Aug 28 2018, the Federal Court   
   partially granted Canada's motion to strike the amended   
   Harris claim. Brown J. declined to strike the portion of the   
   claim concerning the processing time for registration, but   
   struck the portion concerning the period of registration,   
   without leave to amend.   
      
   9. Mr. Harris has appealed the portion of Brown J.'s   
   decision concerning the period of registration and Canada   
   has cross-appealed the portion concerning the registration   
   time (the "Harris appeal"). The parties have completed all   
   steps in the Harris appeal and are awaiting a hearing date.   
   At Mr. Harris' request, the Harris appeal will be heard in   
   Vancouver. Brown J. has directed that the other 250-plus   
   claims in Federal Court will remain stayed pending the   
   Harris appeal with the exemption of plaintiffs interim   
   motions for relief described above.   
      
   C. The Mozajko motions, decision and appeal.   
      
   11. By order dated Oct 2 2018, federal court granted   
   Canada's motion to strike the claim. As in Harris, Brown J.   
   declined to strike the portion of the claim concerning the   
   processing time for registration but struck the portion   
   concerning the period of registration without leave to   
   amend. Brown J. did not issue reasons for decision but noted   
   in his order that the claim advanced essentially the same   
   litigation as the Harris claim and his decision was for the   
   reasons given in the Harris action.   
      
   12. Canada now appeals the portion of Brown J.'s decision   
   concerning registration processing time. Mr. Mozajko cross-   
   appeals the portion of the concerning the period of   
   registration (the Mozajko appeal). Canada has requested the   
   Mozajko appeal be heard in Toronto as Mr. Mozajko is located   
   in southern Ontario and requested a trial in that region.   
      
   13. Canada has filed a Memorandum of Fact and Law in the   
   Mozajko appeal. However, Mr. Mozajko has not filed a   
   memorandum as respondent and cross-appellant and the   
   deadline for him to do so is now passed. Canada,   
   accordingly, has failed to file its own memorandum as   
   respondent to the cross-appeal. However Canada has filed a   
   requisition for hearing.   
      
   14. In a series of letters to the Court, Mr. Mozajko   
   requested that his appeal be heard together with the Harris   
   appeal. By Direction dated April 1 2019, the Court denied   
   this request and directed that the Registry proceed to   
   schedule only the Harris appeal as it is ready for hearing.   
   Stratas J.A. observed that the other appeals involved   
   different plaintiffs, different first-instance decisions,   
   were likely to be heard in different locations and were at   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)