The applicant widow brought a constitutional challenge against the eligibility criteria for liver transplants, arguing that the requirement for patients with alcohol-related liver disease to demonstrate abstinence or undergo rigorous multidisciplinary screening discriminated against them on the basis of their alcohol use disorder.
The court found that while the estate had standing to bring the claim, the challenge to the historical six-month sobriety rule was moot.
On the merits of the current criteria, the court held there was no violation of sections 15(1), 7, or 12 of the Charter, as the criteria were based on the best available medical evidence to allocate scarce organs to those most likely to have successful outcomes.
The court also found that the living donor program criteria were clinical policies not subject to Charter scrutiny.
