Gnarly lawsuit, dude..An 11-year dispute over whether banks can pull mortgages from marijuana users is finally headed to the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, says Blacklock’s Reporter..The dispute dating from 2010 follows Scotiabank’s recall of a loan to a homeowner with a federal licence to grow medical cannabis..“The key question in this motion is who, on the facts and pursuant to the law, is a victim of discrimination,” wrote Edward Lustig, an adjudicator with the Tribunal..Scotiabank had sought to dismiss the complaint..Robert McIlvenna, of Val Therese, Ont., filed the complaint after the bank learned he was growing marijuana plants on his property and denied him further credit..“The bank does not allow marijuana in their communities,” a Scotiabank officer was quoted in evidence..The family was told Scotiabank “was very concerned about the environmental issues within residences where cannabis was grown” and that “growing marijuana at a mortgaged home was prohibited by bank policy.”.The Canadian Human Rights Commission twice rejected McIlvenna’s complaint..The case went to federal judges three times..“For reasons that have not been expressed it is apparent the Human Rights Commission does not like this complaint and wants to be rid of it,” Justice Robert Barnes of the Federal Court wrote in 2019..“In my view the Commission has shown itself to be unfit to resolve this matter such that the court must now direct it to act,” wrote Barnes..The complaint now proceeds to a full Tribunal hearing..It “alleges the Bank of Nova Scotia engaged in a discriminatory practice contrary to the Canadian Human Rights Act by treating the McIlvennas in an adverse differential manner in the provision of services customarily available to the general public,” wrote Lustig..Bank e-mails described the McIlvenna’s house as a “grow-up” though there was no evidence marijuana was sold..One Scotiabank manager earlier told a commission investigator: “We did not finance property that had marijuana growing in it. The only way was if it was completely remediated..“It is very clear in the policy. We wouldn’t be able to provide further financing. (There are) no additional funds based on the appraiser saying what it was used for, growing marijuana.”.Parliament in 2018 legalized recreational marijuana and home cultivation of cannabis plants for personal use. Bill C-45 allowed users to grow up to four marijuana plants at home and store an unlimited amount of processed cannabis.
Gnarly lawsuit, dude..An 11-year dispute over whether banks can pull mortgages from marijuana users is finally headed to the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, says Blacklock’s Reporter..The dispute dating from 2010 follows Scotiabank’s recall of a loan to a homeowner with a federal licence to grow medical cannabis..“The key question in this motion is who, on the facts and pursuant to the law, is a victim of discrimination,” wrote Edward Lustig, an adjudicator with the Tribunal..Scotiabank had sought to dismiss the complaint..Robert McIlvenna, of Val Therese, Ont., filed the complaint after the bank learned he was growing marijuana plants on his property and denied him further credit..“The bank does not allow marijuana in their communities,” a Scotiabank officer was quoted in evidence..The family was told Scotiabank “was very concerned about the environmental issues within residences where cannabis was grown” and that “growing marijuana at a mortgaged home was prohibited by bank policy.”.The Canadian Human Rights Commission twice rejected McIlvenna’s complaint..The case went to federal judges three times..“For reasons that have not been expressed it is apparent the Human Rights Commission does not like this complaint and wants to be rid of it,” Justice Robert Barnes of the Federal Court wrote in 2019..“In my view the Commission has shown itself to be unfit to resolve this matter such that the court must now direct it to act,” wrote Barnes..The complaint now proceeds to a full Tribunal hearing..It “alleges the Bank of Nova Scotia engaged in a discriminatory practice contrary to the Canadian Human Rights Act by treating the McIlvennas in an adverse differential manner in the provision of services customarily available to the general public,” wrote Lustig..Bank e-mails described the McIlvenna’s house as a “grow-up” though there was no evidence marijuana was sold..One Scotiabank manager earlier told a commission investigator: “We did not finance property that had marijuana growing in it. The only way was if it was completely remediated..“It is very clear in the policy. We wouldn’t be able to provide further financing. (There are) no additional funds based on the appraiser saying what it was used for, growing marijuana.”.Parliament in 2018 legalized recreational marijuana and home cultivation of cannabis plants for personal use. Bill C-45 allowed users to grow up to four marijuana plants at home and store an unlimited amount of processed cannabis.
