The appellants challenged the constitutionality of the Narcotic Control Act provisions prohibiting the possession of marihuana for personal use and for the purpose of trafficking.
They argued that the prohibition, and the potential for imprisonment, violated section 7 of the Charter because marihuana use causes little or no harm to others (the 'harm principle').
The Supreme Court of Canada held that the prohibition is a valid exercise of Parliament's criminal law power.
The Court rejected the argument that the 'harm principle' is a principle of fundamental justice under section 7.
The Court found that the state has a legitimate interest in protecting vulnerable groups and society from the harms associated with marihuana use, and that the availability of imprisonment is not grossly disproportionate.
The appeals were dismissed.