The Federal Court of Canada declined a test case of COVID-19 quarantine measures as moot, according to Blacklock’s Reporter. .“Unless the Court grapples with a test case, even though it may be moot, the constitutionality of the measures may never be examined,” said lawyers arguing on behalf of 11 Canadians who challenged the Quarantine Act in a statement. .A judge said arguing whether the Canadian government breached the Charter of Rights and Freedoms was unnecessary since all mask and vaccine mandates have been repealed. .The applicants were fined as much as $3,000 for declining to submit proof of vaccination upon arriving in Canada from abroad. .“There is no longer a live controversy,” said Federal Court of Canada Justice Avvy Yao-Yao Go..Go said the dispute has disappeared, since mandates are no longer enforced. .While there have been numerous instances where courts decided to grant declaratory relief about past Charter breaches, Go said it was not mandatory. She added quarantine orders were enforced “in an exceptional context, namely a specific point of the COVID-19 pandemic.”.Judges nationwide to date have acknowledged COVID-19 restrictions were unconstitutional but were justified due to extraordinary circumstances. .“Like in times of war and other crises, pandemics call for sacrifices to save lives and avoid broad-based suffering,” said Federal Court Chief Justice Paul Crampton. .If people were unwilling to make such sacrifices and engage in behaviour which posed a demonstrated risk to their health and safety, Crampton said the principles of fundamental justice “will not prevent the state from performing its essential function of protecting its citizens.”.“This has called for extraordinary measures from our governments as well as great sacrifices by one and all,” said Crampton. .“Protecting us from the threat to our health and security is one of the most fundamental responsibilities of a state.”.The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) confirmed in September legal action will continue on behalf of 11 applicants who were directed to quarantine or fined for not using ArriveCan despite the Canadian government eliminating it. .READ MORE: Justice Centre lawsuit against ArriveCan to continue.“While we're pleased these arbitrary measures have been dropped, we will continue to zealously advocate for Canadians who had their constitutional rights violated by ArriveCAN,” said JCCF lawyer Eva Chipiuk. .“Hundreds and possibly thousands of Canadians, including our clients, are still facing charges for not complying with the federal government’s travel requirements.”
The Federal Court of Canada declined a test case of COVID-19 quarantine measures as moot, according to Blacklock’s Reporter. .“Unless the Court grapples with a test case, even though it may be moot, the constitutionality of the measures may never be examined,” said lawyers arguing on behalf of 11 Canadians who challenged the Quarantine Act in a statement. .A judge said arguing whether the Canadian government breached the Charter of Rights and Freedoms was unnecessary since all mask and vaccine mandates have been repealed. .The applicants were fined as much as $3,000 for declining to submit proof of vaccination upon arriving in Canada from abroad. .“There is no longer a live controversy,” said Federal Court of Canada Justice Avvy Yao-Yao Go..Go said the dispute has disappeared, since mandates are no longer enforced. .While there have been numerous instances where courts decided to grant declaratory relief about past Charter breaches, Go said it was not mandatory. She added quarantine orders were enforced “in an exceptional context, namely a specific point of the COVID-19 pandemic.”.Judges nationwide to date have acknowledged COVID-19 restrictions were unconstitutional but were justified due to extraordinary circumstances. .“Like in times of war and other crises, pandemics call for sacrifices to save lives and avoid broad-based suffering,” said Federal Court Chief Justice Paul Crampton. .If people were unwilling to make such sacrifices and engage in behaviour which posed a demonstrated risk to their health and safety, Crampton said the principles of fundamental justice “will not prevent the state from performing its essential function of protecting its citizens.”.“This has called for extraordinary measures from our governments as well as great sacrifices by one and all,” said Crampton. .“Protecting us from the threat to our health and security is one of the most fundamental responsibilities of a state.”.The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) confirmed in September legal action will continue on behalf of 11 applicants who were directed to quarantine or fined for not using ArriveCan despite the Canadian government eliminating it. .READ MORE: Justice Centre lawsuit against ArriveCan to continue.“While we're pleased these arbitrary measures have been dropped, we will continue to zealously advocate for Canadians who had their constitutional rights violated by ArriveCAN,” said JCCF lawyer Eva Chipiuk. .“Hundreds and possibly thousands of Canadians, including our clients, are still facing charges for not complying with the federal government’s travel requirements.”
