Allard v. Canada
2016 FC 236

Allard is the seminal case on access to cannabis by medical patients. Kirk was part of a legal team headed by John Conroy, QC that convinced a Federal Court Judge to strike down Canada’s medical cannabis system as unduly restrictive in large part because it took away patients’ rights to produce cannabis for their own medical use. As a result, Canada implemented a new system of access in August 2016.

R. v. Smith
2015 SCC 34

The Crown appealed the trial court decision to the British Columbia Court of Appeal and, after losing that appeal, took the matter to the Supreme Court of Canada. The highest court in the land upheld Mr. Smith’s historic Charter victory and confirmed that medical cannabis patients have a right to access derivative forms of the medicine. Mr. Smith’s acquittal was affirmed and Tousaw Law Corporation is honoured to have won a unanimous victory for patients’ rights in the Supreme Court of Canada.

R. v. Beren and Swallow
2009 BCSC 429

Mr. Beren produced cannabis for the Vancouver Island Compassion Society. He was charged with producing over 1000 cannabis plants for medical purposes. The Government of Canada amended the MMAR in response to this decision.

R. v. Sundstrom
2013 BCCA 244

Prior to Mr. Tousaw’s representation, Mr. Sundstrom pled guilty to producing cannabis. His sentence included full forfeiture of an un-mortgaged property he had owned for decades then valued at over $600,000. We successfully argued that full forfeiture was unjust in the circumstances and that, instead, partial forfeiture of the property should be ordered. In a first-of-its-kind decision, the Court of Appeal agreed and entered an order forfeiting half the property.

R. v. Payette
2010 BCCA 392

In another case in which Mr. Tousaw was involved only on appeal, Mr. Payette had been convicted of possessing cannabis for the purpose of trafficking after being stopped at a roadside traffic check. A drug-sniffing dog had been used by police. We successfully argued that the search violated section 8 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and that the trial judge had erred by ruling otherwise. Mr. Payette’s conviction was overturned.