On March 21, 2014, Federal Court Judge Michael D. Manson granted an injunction, preserving the rights of individuals with personal production licenses under the Medical Marihuana Access Regulations (MMAR) to continue growing their own medical cannabis while a constitutional challenge (Allard et al. v. R.) is heard. This trial is expected to take place on February 23, 2015.
What exactly is an injunction?
An injunction is issued at the court's discretion, and is a court order that acts as an "equitable remedy". These are typically appropriate to prevent an action, to stop ongoing or repeated conduct that violates a person's rights or causes injuries, or to force a defendant to take action in order to prevent harm. Injunctions can be sought as a final remedy, or in this case, at a preliminary stage before a trial.
Am I covered by the injunction?
If you were an authorized medical cannabis patient under the MMAR, you must meet two requirements in order to be covered by this injunction:
1. Your Personal Production License / Designated Production License (PPL/DPL) must have been valid on September 30, 2013
2. Your Authorization to Possess (ATP) must have been valid on March 21, 2014
What if my ATP expired before March 21, 2014?
There have been many patients that meet the first requirement, but their ATP expired sometime before the March 21st deadline. John Conroy posted the following on his site:
Those who have "possession" ATP expiry before March 21, 2014 should get an authorization from their doctor under reg 53 of the Narcotic Control regs to the same effect (dosage) to cover them if they still have valid PPL/DG September 30, 2013.
This means if your production license was valid as of September 30, but your ATP expired before March 21, you'll have to see your doctor for some additional documentation to ensure you're covered by the injunction, where Section 53 of the Controlled Drug and Substance Act explains:
53. Continuity of Possession (1) In any proceeding under this Act or the regulations, continuity of possession of any exhibit tendered as evidence in that proceeding may be proved by the testimony of, or the affidavit or solemn declaration of, the person claiming to have had it in their possession.
Alternative Method of Proof (2) Where an affidavit or solemn declaration is offered in proof of continuity of possession under subsection (1), the court may require the affiant or declarant to appear before it for examination or cross-examination in respect of continuity of possession.
Tangibly, it means patients with expired ATPs before March 21st need to get a letter, prescription or simply a form from their doctor that authorizes them -- essentially replicating what was found in the MMAR document with respect to authorized possession, grams per day, and signed by the doctor to be in compliance with regulations 53.
What if my address changes?
This is a tricky one since cultivation is place dependent, and will have to be answered by a Court at some point because the MMAR are technically no longer valid regulations. This exemption was granted based on the terms and conditions of the previous MMAR license (except for the expiry date and the 150g possession limit). However, this is a subject of
cross-appeal.
So now I can only have 150 grams at one time?
The ATP possession limit is the lesser of 150g or your listed maximum, but storage limits associated with production remain the same.
ALSO ON HUFFPOST:
