Medical marijuana class action against Health Canada certified by Federal Court

Discussion in 'Canadian Patients' started by gb123, Jul 29, 2015.


    gb123 Well-Known Member

    40,000 people received envelope marked with medical marijuana access program's name
    CBC News Posted: Jul 29, 2015 8:19 AM AT Last Updated: Jul 29, 2015 8:52 AM AT

    These letters were sent to approximately 40,000 medical marijuana users across Canada. (CBC)

    The Federal Court of Canada has certified a class-action lawsuit involving 40,000 people in the medical marijuana access program.

    The case was launched in 2013 after Health Canada sent letters to people with the program's name on the envelope. Before that, mail sent to individuals in the program didn't mention marijuana.

    Recipients were upset, saying their privacy had been violated. Some said they worried they'd lose their jobs or become victims of a home invasion.

    In March this year, the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada ruled that Health Canada had violated federal privacy laws. That ruling didn't allow for any compensation.

    In a press release, the Halifax law firm that launched the case says the certification shows the Federal Court has decided the class-action lawsuit is necessary to allow people access to justice.

    The plaintiffs are seeking damages for breach of contract, breach of confidence, invasion of privacy and charter violations.

    Health Canada sent letters to approximately 40,000 people across the country to inform them of changes to the Marijuana Medical Access Program beginning April 1. The Federal Court of Canada has now certified their class action lawsuit. (Canadian Press)

    "This is not over yet, but the thousands of affected program members should take some comfort that every legal claim we advanced on their behalf has been approved to go forward," said David Fraser of McInnes Cooper.

    McInnes Cooper is jointly representing users from across Canada with Branch MacMaster LLP of Vancouver, Charney Lawyers of Toronto, and Sutts, Strosberg LLP of Toronto and Windsor, Ont.

    David Robins of Sutts, Strosberg LLP says more than 1,000 people have registered on an online site for the lawsuit to explain how the breach affected them.

    The federal government now has 30 days to appeal the Federal Court's certification.

    Jackal69 Well-Known Member

    You guys prepare for some cash lol
    McInnes Cooper guys won the veterans class action against Manulife

    WHATFG Well-Known Member

    Another feather in our cap and a rock tied to Harptlers ankle....
    cannadan, The Hippy, GrowRock and 3 others like this.

    gb123 Well-Known Member

    it aint about the money, it's about the fear and anxiety any grower would feel knowing the mailman is on to them. and anyone else who read the names.
    it's about the fact peoples private medical info was passed on like it was every day knowledge.
    It was about the fact that HC blatantly put every MMAR patients health at risk and harm.
    just to name a few

    Gmack420 Well-Known Member

    Preach the truth GB. Every mmar grower I know were mentally affected by this breach as you say.

    gb123 Well-Known Member

    They had a tough time at it just keeping things to themselves... GIVING THEM AWAY!!! just made it Far Far worse.
    To put a persons health at risk by pursuing an avenue of coercion is what needs to be dealt with.
    CalyxCrusher, GrowRock and Gmack420 like this.

    VIANARCHRIS Well-Known Member

    Speak for yourself, lol, I want the money! It was all about the fear and anxiety when it happened, now I'm just pissed and want HC to pay. Just for fun, Anyone have any guesses as to the average amount and when we can expect it?

    gb123 Well-Known Member

    nothing :) after the case is done thats why they took it on..they know they have a win and it will pay the pocket books until then .
    thats bizzz

    doingdishes Well-Known Member

    i think Conroy said about $1k per person....better than nothing but how should i use that money to stop the comments and dirty looks we get now? whatever amount it is, we can't change the perception. i had a lady get upset with me "you don't have to smoke it"...I got off the elevator before i could ask her how to use it to stimulate appetite...
    GrowRock likes this.

    Flash63 Well-Known Member

    I found this as well.......
    Federal Court certifies privacy class action by Medical Marijuana patients against Health Canada
    HALIFAX, July 28, 2015 /CNW/ - The Federal Court of Canada has certified a class action commenced on behalf of more than 40,000 medical marijuana licensees alleging that Health Canada violated their privacy.

    In November 2013, Health Canada sent notices to over 40,000 participants of the Marihuana Medical Access Program (MMAP) to advise of changes to regulations governing the use of medical marijuana in Canada. The notices were delivered in oversized envelopes that had the words "Health Canada - Marihuana Medical Access Program" on the return address, revealing to anyone who saw the envelope that the recipient was licensed to possess or produce medical marihuana for medical purposes. Previously, Health Canada's mailings to MMAP members were discreet and made no mention of marijuana on the envelopes. Despite the Government of Canada's acknowledgement of the error, it insists that no one was harmed by the breach.

    In March 2015, the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada concluded that Health Canada violated federal privacy laws. However, in the recent certification decision, the Court found that the class action is necessary to provide access to justice because the Privacy Commissioner cannot order the Government of Canada to compensate class members harmed by the breach. The Government has 30 days to appeal the certification decision.

    McInnes Cooper, Branch MacMaster LLP, Charney Lawyers, and Sutts Strosberg LLP are jointly representing the plaintiffs in the medical marijuana privacy breach class action filed in the Federal Court against the Government of Canada. The plaintiffs seek damages for breach of contract, breach of confidence, invasion of privacy and Charter violations.

    "We are very glad to see this case moving forward. The certification decision means that the Court has agreed that this is an appropriate case for a class action and that allowing all of the class members to proceed in a group is in the interests of justice," said Ward Branch of Branch MacMaster LLP. "The Government of Canada has fought us at every turn, but have also lost each motion to date. We are hopeful that they will now see the wisdom of sitting down to resolve the issues created by this error."

    "This is not over yet, but the thousands of affected program members should take some comfort that every legal claim we advanced on their behalf has been approved to go forward," said David Fraser of McInnes Cooper.

    "As citizens of this great country, we rely on our government to protect our sensitive personal information from being disclosed and to protect our privacy during all communications. This decision sends a clear message to the government that our Courts consider privacy to be of the utmost importance and expect our government to take its privacy obligations seriously or face the consequences," said Ted Charney of Charney Lawyers.

    "Over one thousand people have registered on our secure website to tell us how the breach affected them. We will continue to pursue justice for those harmed by the breach," said David Robins of Sutts, Strosberg LLP.

    While it is not necessary to "opt in" to participate in the class action, class members are urged to visit the website to obtain updates and to register because the information collected on the secured site will assist class counsel in communicating with class members and moving the case forward. Those who have already registered do not need to re-register but should update their information if their circumstances change or to report further harm suffered from the breach.

    About Branch MacMaster LLPBranch MacMaster LLP is a boutique litigation law firm established in 1998 and located in Vancouver, British Columbia. The firm focuses on class actions, health, insurance, and personal injury. The firm provides responsive, flexible, and cost-effective service to their clientele.

    About Charney LawyersCharney Lawyers is a Toronto, Ontario firm with an established reputation for excellence in advocacy. The firm is experienced in personal injury, class proceedings, commercial litigation, insurance defence, employment law, medical malpractice, food borne illness, construction law and appeals.

    About McInnes CooperMcInnes Cooper is among the top business and litigation law firms in Canada, with more than 200 lawyers in seven Canadian offices, serving clients across North America and abroad. The firm is a market leader in energy and natural resources, business, litigation, employment, tax, real estate and insurance law. McInnes Cooper is the exclusive member firm in Newfoundland, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island for Lex Mundi – the world's leading network of independent law firms with in-depth experience in 100+ countries worldwide.

    About Sutts Strosberg LLPSutts, Strosberg LLP is a nationally recognized law firm committed to excellence in litigation, with offices in Windsorand Toronto. The firm has a special interest in class actions, having represented groups or classes of individuals in every province and territory, and in every level of court, and is experienced in complex civil and commercial disputes, corporate, commercial and financial transactions, medical malpractice cases, personal injury cases, family law and criminal law.

    SOURCE McInnes Cooper

    Flash63 Well-Known Member

    Just so happens that my mail lady, is my also my neighbour...not to happy about that.
    doingdishes, GrowRock and Gmack420 like this.

    GrowRock Well-Known Member

    Ya I have family that work at my post office... Fuuucck was there Alot of questions .....
    doingdishes, Gmack420 and Flash63 like this.

    bigmanc Well-Known Member

    Mail lady is related to someone on my street. I drive by every damn day and that sister/mother of my mail lady drops everything while I drive by just to stare. Maybe they like my car or my mail lasy spilled the beans.
    Flash63 and GrowRock like this.

    bigmanc Well-Known Member

    Actually I think she did say something, I recall running down the stairs the day my MMAR tracking number said out for delivery when I opened the door for her she smiled and said "you've really been waiting for this huh" all rings a bell, should have thought.
    doingdishes, GrowRock and Gmack420 like this.

    realmeduser Well-Known Member

    I am positive that mine came through regular mail with no tracking or anything.
    It is sitting around here somewhere, I believe unopened.

    edit.. I just checked, and the postage is inside the large window. Part of the issues was them leaving it in your mailbox for others eyes.
    Last edited: Jul 29, 2015
    cannadan and GrowRock like this.

    GrowRock Well-Known Member

    Ya mine came through snail mail too...
    cannadan likes this.

    bigmanc Well-Known Member

    I speaking of the actual pink slips, i believe she knew the whole time...must recognize the return address on the express post envolope.

    Incase you guys are talking about pinks, not express? the privacy complaint said all licenses before the privacy breach came express post.

    torontoke Well-Known Member

    I know of three people that are part of this lawsuit and they have all been told different things.
    One was told after expenses etc he can expect 1000-2000, the second was told approx 5000 and the last guy said his lawyer was pushing him to sign anything over to the coalition of conroys vacation fund.

    I wonder how many of the 1000 will donate to conroy now.?
    cannadan likes this.

    Flash63 Well-Known Member

    Any time frame on when I'll be cashing my cheque?
    GrowRock likes this.

    cannadan Well-Known Member

    1000 bucks barely covers security camera's....they should be forced to ensure each and every one of the people breached. has adequate security. and those that don't the gov should be paying for it...
    3000 to 5000.00 should be more like it...minimum.....or I want better lawyers
    GrowRock likes this.

Share This Page