injunction/court case updates

I got the seeds out yesterday too...lol

itsmehigh said:

128] Mr. Wilkins, an insurance broker with LMG Insurance Brokers (the insurance company is Lloyds of London), was a rebuttal expert for the Plaintiffs. He stated that in the course of his work between 2010 to the present, he has arranged for building insurance for approximately 300 MMAR cannabis growers who grow inside their residences, in outbuildings and at commercial properties. He provided expert evidence on the issue of insurability of legal MMAR sites, including risks of fire and theft at MMAR grow sites. He stated that the cannabis garden facilities he insures are properly and safely installed according to applicable by-laws and codes.

His evidence speaks to the workability of the MMAR in terms of community impacts. It also demonstrates that the MMAR sites did not pose the same problems as the illicit sites discussed by Dybvig.


Itsme

Click to expand...

Irrelevant, they no longer offer those policies...and actually didn't when Scott was giving testimony.

Hopefully they will offer them again soon.

hmmm..that wasn't that long ago..so I thought....but I will admit I only watched about 5 mins....
before I gave up....I tried but just couldn't take much more....

Happy Day

I had the faith

Its was a little anti-climatic in a way....
we will be seeing details of what the gov comes up with in reality .... in 6 months....
as long as there are no stall tactics....
I hope I'm done sweating this issue now though.....whew....
the details coming may not sit so well with patients ...depending how they structure things.....
back to waiting......

i think they'll mess with plant counts but i hope not

Looking down the road, if they allow for home grows under recreational legal grows for the general public one would assume that medical patients are allowed a higher plant count.

i guess the judge was a bit pissed as he awarded costs. here's what that meant
"Substantial indemnity costs may also be awarded where there has been reprehensible, scandalous or outrageous conduct on the part of one of the parties. However, such costs would not usually be awarded against a plaintiff in the absence of that kind conduct. Keep in mind that even substantial indemnity awards are not a total reimbursement of all fees."

Is there anything in the decision that protects our plant counts as well as whether or not we can increase them? I bet we're all feeling a huge sense of relief!

CalyxCrusher said:

Looking down the road, if they allow for home grows under recreational legal grows for the general public one would assume that medical patients are allowed a higher plant count.

Click to expand...

Agreed, that's how a rational person would do it. Let's see what the Gov't regulations look like to that same rational person in a few months.

we should have figured at least a little common sense will creep into this whole topic.....
It is 2016....most of us can think for ourselves....for the most part.
..no longer can they hide behind
printed new's slow influence.....it used to be slow influence but very effective tool used by governments and industry too
destined to rule and regulate...you..lol sorry Frank....
Now the vast majority of the world, can know about something in a matter of hours, even minutes....
pretty hard to pull the wool over your eye in the same way......now it has to be well thought out....to be a successful
scam.....
We, as a developed country are at a significant disadvantage ,mostly due to the fact....A huge majority of the printed
and virtual text ownership is not very diverse....so only "one point of view" unless you go searching for peoples blogs or news feeds or facebook posts etc....
It should have not been allowed to happen....but of course we in Canada seem to bounce back and forth and back again....between the Libs and the Cons both of which look pretty pathetic at times....

An asskicking in court motivates some real words...."MMJ and MJ markets will be separate..."

http://ipolitics.ca/2016/02/24/philpott-on-medical-marijuana-ruling-dont-mix-it-up-with-legalization/

excellent.

TheRealDman said:

An asskicking in court motivates some real words...."MMJ and MJ markets will be separate..."

http://ipolitics.ca/2016/02/24/philpott-on-medical-marijuana-ruling-dont-mix-it-up-with-legalization/

Click to expand...

i guess they thought that up to this point they were the same??? i love how Governments live in some kind of bubble...not reality

I am celerating as we all should tonight. That said, I have another thought... The MMAR injuction effects 28,000 people and some others fell through the cracks. If they reduce our plant count in six months time it's my belief that some people will take that to court. If I am at 198 plants and they tell me that I can only have 6 then there's no way I would accept that BS and I would hire Kirk the lawyer to fight it for me. Wouldn't you guys?

I don't see how they can lower our plant count. Isn't that up to the doctors?

I would love for them to have some patients help construct the new regime. The perspective of some of us who use cannabis as medicine would likely be of high value in making sensible policies that actually work for the patients while at the same time minimizing the abuse of the system. I for one would love to go to Ottawa and work on this.

I think plant count will be a huge issue. Anybody read the entire decision? It was mentioned that 1-5 grams a day is the average and Canada is well above that average at 18. An expert said that he could get the same off 6 plants as 600, and that the effectiveness diminishes on a u curve, consuming more has no bennifit.

Itsme.

Run for government Brian Savage. I encourage anyone to go for it! Good question R. Raider on the plant count issue. I really hope they don't try to reduce our plant counts. That would suck balls!

Not that is matter much... as i will continue to grow my meds...but...

I wonder where i stand in all this. In Sep 13 i sent in my renewal to posess and grow, right when the whole program was first suspended. When i did not recieve the new licenses by dec i inquired. My apps were lost, i guess, because HC didnt have mine. So i sent them again. Never got anything back. So my then current licenses expired on Feb 6/14. Then i moved in Mar 14.

How does this decision affect me?