A Federal Court judge has ordered the Canadian Human Rights Commission to reopen a discrimination complaint filed by an Ontario medical marijuana user who alleges Scotiabank revoked his mortgage because he was growing cannabis in his home.The ruling is the latest in a series of court decisions questioning whether Canada's human rights watchdog properly investigated complaints involving medical marijuana users and property rights.Federal Court Justice Avvy Yao-Yao Go ruled the commission failed to conduct a fair investigation into Andrew Martin's complaint before dismissing it."At the heart of the applicant's complaint was the issue of why Scotiabank called its loan," Go wrote in her decision."The applicant provided evidence and submissions alleging the primary reason for Scotiabank's decision to call the loan was because the applicant was growing marijuana within his property."Martin, an Orillia, Ont., resident who uses medical marijuana, argued the bank's decision amounted to discrimination based on disability. The Canadian Human Rights Commission dismissed his complaint in 2018.Justice Go found investigators failed to adequately examine the evidence, including by not interviewing witnesses identified by Martin."Failure to interview any witness proposed by the applicant undermines the fairness of the investigation," she wrote, ordering the commission to reconsider the case.The decision follows another similar legal battle involving Scotiabank..In 2017, the Federal Court ordered the Human Rights Commission to reopen a complaint filed by Ryan McIlvenna of Val Therese, Ont., after Scotiabank withdrew his mortgage when it learned he was growing medical marijuana in his home.According to court records, a Scotiabank employee told McIlvenna the bank "does not allow marijuana in their communities."McIlvenna testified he was informed the bank was concerned about environmental risks associated with growing cannabis inside homes and that growing marijuana in a mortgaged property violated bank policy.Internal bank emails described the residence as a "grow-up."After the Human Rights Commission dismissed McIlvenna's complaint twice, the Federal Court of Appeal ordered the agency to reconsider the case.The disputes arise after Parliament passed Bill C-45, the Cannabis Act, in 2018, legalizing recreational marijuana for adults across Canada.The legislation allows adults to grow up to four cannabis plants at home, including in rental properties, and possess up to 30 grams of dried cannabis.At the time the legislation was introduced, the Department of Justice acknowledged it had conducted no research into how legalized home cannabis cultivation could affect property rights or mortgage lending.The Senate attempted to amend the legislation to allow provinces and municipalities to prohibit home cultivation, passing the proposal by a 56-30 vote.The Liberal government rejected the amendment.Defending the legislation at the time, then-health minister Ginette Petitpas Taylor argued Canadians were already permitted to produce other regulated products at home."Canadians can grow tobacco and make wine or beer at home," Petitpas Taylor said. "We believe Canadians will be able to safely grow a small number of plants."
