Docstoc

Court File No Court File No ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF ONTARIO

Document Sample
Court File No Court File No ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF ONTARIO Powered By Docstoc
					                                                       Court File No.: _______________

                                   ONTARIO
                          SUPERIOR COURT OF ONTARIO

BETWEEN:

                  FREEDOM OF CHOICE IN HEALTH CARE INC;
                  Trueman of the Tuck Clan aka TRUEMAN TUCK;
                                                                                 Plaintiffs

                                          -and-

                     THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA;
                            MINISTER OF HEALTH;
                         MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE;
                         MINISTER OF PUBLIC SAFETY;
                                                                               Defendants


                         AFFIDAVI T OF RICHARD BEEMER

    I, RICHARD BEEMER, of the City of Burlington, in the Province of Ontario
MAKE OATH AND SAY:

1. I am the sole Director, Officer and Shareholder of the corporate Plaintiff and, as such,

have knowledge of the matters herein deposed to.

2. I am further a member of Freedom of Choice in Health Care Inc. and supporter of the

Canadian Coalition for Health Freedom.

ENCOUNTER WITH HEALTH CANADA

(A)      2002

3. My first major encounter with Canadian federal criminal regulatory authorities were

went I received a letter from Kristy Matthews dated August 7th, 2002. Ms. Kristy

Mathews identified herself as a Compliance Officer with the Drug Investigations Unit of

Health Canada on Midland Avenue in Scarborough. Her letter stated as follows:

      (a) Complaints had been received in regards to the product GHR15.
                                        Page 2



   (b) My website, www.biehealth.com, information, pamphlets and ingredient list had
       been reviewed by Health Canada. Ingredients such as arginine, lysine and
       tyrosine are amino acids and are considered to be drug products.

   (c) BIE was required to comply with the Food and Drugs Act to be able to sell my
       product in Canada. GHR15 is a drug and I was required to have a DIN. As
       GHR15 did not have a DIN assigned, she advised that the product should not be
       offered for sale in Canada.

4. In June 25, 2002, Lesley Beaton, a Compliance Officer for Health Canada, then wrote
to Mr. Steve Tuck, Publisher, B.C. Interior Edition, Forever Young and stated the
following:

   (a) Their office received an inquiry in regards to the advertisement of my product,
       “GHR15: The Reverse Aging Miracle” I had placed with Forever Young, B.C.
       Edition in March 2002 wherein the advertisement made claims for medical
       conditions such as AIDS, cancer, angina and diabetes, which are Schedule „A‟
       diseases under the Food and Drugs Act.

   (b) He further states, “The advertisement of a food, drug, cosmetic or device to the
       general public as a treatment or cure for any Schedule ‘A’ diseases is a violation
       of the Food and Drug Act and its Regulations.”

   (c) The claims of this product placed it in the category of a pharmaceutical drug
       category. Food and Drugs Act and Regulations state that a drug cannot be sold in
       Canada without a Drug Identification Number (DIN) which allows the customer
       to know that the product has undergone and has passed tests by Health Canada for
       safeness and effectiveness.

5. On October 2, 2002, I received a letter from Kevin Chin, another Compliance Officer

with the Drug Investigations Unit of Health Canada, also working at the Midland,

Scarborough office of Health Canada wherein he states:

   (a) Complaints had been filed against BIE advertising GHR in Forever Young edition
       of the Toronto Star in August 2002 wherein the advertisement make therapeutic
       claims, such as, increased sexual potency, reverse baldness and reverse many
       degenerative disease symptoms.

   (b) GHR15 is infringing the Food and Drugs Act and Drug Regulations in violation
       of section 9(1) of the Act and C.01.014 of the Regulations.
                                          Page 3


   (c) BIE was directed to immediately stop the promotion and sale of GHR15 until
       such time as the product is brought into compliance with Health Canada‟s
       regulatory requirements.

6. I researched the situation and found that in 1999, a Standing Committee on Health

made 53 recommendations regarding the regulation of natural health products. Two of

these were that Health Canada review the diseases listed in Schedule „A‟ of the Food and

Drug Act and initiate a review to determine whether 3(1) & (2) of the Act or all of the

diseases listed in Schedule „A‟ should be deleted.

7. I also became aware that in October 2002 as a result of our Health Freedom

delegations meeting with senior Ottawa Health Canada and Department of Justice

officials that a memo was sent to the then Minister of Health stating,

               “Current regulations do not provide sufficient penalty to strongly
               encourage compliance while Department of Justice considers that
               the current provisions would probably not withstand a Charter
               Challenge. Forthcoming under separate cover is a legal opinion
               of a possible charter challenge on the grounds of freedom of
               speech.”

8. I responded to these allegations by forwarding a letter to the Drug Investigations Unit

of Health Canada on October 8, 2002 wherein I stated we do not have in possession the

product for sale neither do we distribute the product in Canada. I clarified that our

company was solely operating as an international call center and that all product was

being shipped in accordance with the applicable Canadian laws.

9. Compliance Officer Christie Canivel of the Drug Investigations Unit with Health

Canada stated the following in response in her letter of October 21, 2002:

   (a) If any of the activities listed in the definition of “sell” are performed, it is
       considered a sale. The list is not inclusive.

   (b) Because GHR 15 is distributed by BIE Health Products as indicated on my
       product label and my advertisements, BIE Health Products is selling GHR 15.
                                         Page 4



   (c) Importation of Human-Use Drugs for Personal Use Enforcement directive does
       not apply to the activities conducted by my company. If any amount of this
       product is sold or offered for sale within Canada, it does not fall under this
       directive.

   (d) Because GHR 15 contains Amino Acids, it is not subject to special measures and
       therefore requires a DIN. My advertisement also validates that this product is not
       subject to special measures as it states in Schedule „A‟ claims for HGH.
       Although this is not a direct claim for GHR 15, it is a claim by association and is
       not acceptable.

   (e) I was requested to immediately cease sale and advertising of these products, until
       all regulatory requirements had been met, including the assignment of a DIN. If
       this request was not fulfilled, stronger enforcement actions would be initiated.

10. On October 25, 2002, I wrote to Kristy Matthews, Kevin Chin and Christie Canivel,

Compliance Officers with the Drug Investigations Unit of Health Canada stating the

following:

   (a) BIE was compliant with the current legislation.

   (b) Explained in detail the legislation and how my business works.

   (c) Having reviewed Section 9(1) of the Food and Drug Act, BIE would no longer
       advertise GHR in Canada.

   (d) Requesting that one of the three Compliance Officers respond to my letter and not
       all three. How many times would I have to answer the same questions to different
       Compliance Officers?

11. On November 1, 2002, while acknowledging my intention to no longer advertise in

Canada, Christie Canivel, Compliance Officer with Health Canada, stated the following:

   (a) BIE GHR 15 is infringing the Food and Drug Act and Food and Drug
       Regulations.

   (b) BIE must immediately cease sale of these products until all regulatory
       requirements were met, including a DIN.
                                             Page 5


12. I responded on November 12, 2002 to Christie Canivel, of Health Canada, indicating

that labels for GHR 15 would be changed to show the distributor as being BIE Health

Products America….

(B)      2003

13. On January 8, 2003, Christie Canivel, of Health Canada, wrote to me and stated the

following:

      (a) A copy of the revised label, as well as, notification of when the revised label was
          first used was required.

      (b) If BIE Health Products is not the distributor of GHR 15 and it is in fact distributed
          by BIE Health Products America, it should be clear to the buyer that this product
          is not offered for sale in Canada at quantities exceeding personal use as outlined
          in the Importation of Human Use Drugs for Personal Use Enforcement Directive.

      (c) All contact or order information indentified on the web site making reference to a
          Canadian source should be removed from the site to avoid violation of Section
          9(1).

14. I responded by forwarding a copy of the U.S. label and altering the Registrant,

Administrative and Technical contacts to show the U.S. Company and its address

particulars.

15. On June 6, 2003, Compliance Officer Christie Canivel, of the Drug Investigations

Unit with Health Canada wrote to me and stated the following:

      (a) They have received more complaints about GHR 15.

      (b) GHR 15 is infringing the Food and Drugs Act and the Food and Drug
          Regulations.

      (c) By July 7, 2003, BIE must have a plan to comply with the legislation.

      (d) GHR 15 must not be offered for sale or advertised to the Canadian Market.

16. On July 14, 2003, Compliance Officer Christine Canivel, of the Drug Investigations

Unit of Health Canada, wrote to 50 Plus Magazine and stated the following:
                                          Page 6


   (a) There have been complaints about the advertising of GHR 15 in their magazine.

   (b) Advertising GHR-15 infringes sections of the Food and Drug Act and Food and
       Drug Regulations.

   (c) No future advertisements are made in 50 Plus Magazine for GHR 15.

17. On August 6, 2003, Compliance Officer Christie Canivel, of the Drug Investigations

Unit with Health Canada, wrote to me and stated the following:

   (a) There had been at least nine (9) complaints regarding BIE Health about the
       advertising of GHR 15.

   (b) Health Canada had on several occasions requested I cease advertising GHR 15.

   (c) Since October 25, 2002, advertisements for GHR 15 have been placed in several
       publications, such as Toronto Life Magazine (March 2003), New Directions
       (June/July 2003), and 50 Plus Magazine (June/July 2003) submitted by Richard
       Beemer.

   (d) I am in violation of Section 24 of the Food and Drugs Act.

   (e) After being informed, Richard Beemer of BIE Health America was responsible
       for all advertising; the US Federal Trade Commission was contacted and made
       aware of the web site. Confirmation that the web site is owned and operated by
       BIE Health in Canada has been communicated to the US FTC.

   (f) I was requested to cease all advertising for this product, including the Internet.

18. On August 26, 2003, I wrote to Compliance Officer Christie Canivel, of the Drug

Investigations Unit with Health Canada, stating the following:

   (a) Health Canada was out of their jurisdiction regarding their statements about my
       U.S. operation.

   (b) Mr. Russell Beemer was no longer associated with BIE Health America and our
       president, Mr. Robert Paskus, located in California, would be more than willing to
       work with the U.S. authorities but as Health Canada does not have cross border
       jurisdiction, he was not prepared to entertain their erroneous comments.

   (c) The 1998 Parliamentary Standing Committee on Health found that s. 3(1) was out
       of sync with modern legislation and recommended repealing both s. 3(1) and
       Schedule „A‟. Further, the transition team struck by Minister of Health, Allan
       Rock, stated in its Final Report, “Sections 3(1) and 3(2) and Schedule A of the
                                        Page 7


       Food and Drugs Act are no longer relevant. They do not serve any purpose that
       cannot be accomplished adequately by other sections of the legislation or
       regulations. More importantly, the schedule does not reflect contemporary
       scientific thought. The weight of modern scientific evidence confirms the
       mitigation and prevention of many diseases and disorders listed in Schedule A
       through the judicious use of NHPs. It is time that the legislation and regulations
       reflect the prevailing sciences.”

   (d) Section 2 of the Constitution gives the following rights: Section 2(b) freedom of
       thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other
       media and communication. Additionally, Section 52(1) states, “The Constitution
       of Canada is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with the
       provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of inconsistency, of no force and
       effect.”

19. Jean-Marc Charron, of the Ontario and Nunavut Operational Centre Manager for

Health Products and Food Branch Inspectorate, responded on August 29, 2003 by stating:

   (a) He advised me of the head office location at 3201 Midland Avenue, Toronto,
       Ontario with the hours of 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. daily except for weekends and
       holidays.

   (b) Staff members are not to be contacted at their homes under any circumstances.

   (c) Should there be any dealings with Health Canada officials at their personal
       dwelling of a threatening nature, it may generate a response by the local law
       enforcement authorities.


20. In August/September 2003, I received a letter from Health Canada advising me what

had transpired with my recent shipment of drug product. They advised:

   (a) When a shipment of drug products is screened by the Canadian Customs and
       Revenue Agency (CCRA) for entry into Canada, it may be referred to Health
       Canada for further examination, who examines the shipment to determine if the
       importation would be permissible according to the Food and Drugs Act and
       Regulations.

   (b) Authorization from Health Canada has not been obtained for the marketing of
       GHR/GHR 15 in Canada. Safety, quality and efficiency have not been
       established.
                                            Page 8


      (c) The actual shipment remains under the control of the CCRA. It is our
          understanding that CCRA returns such shipments back to their origin whenever
          possible.

      (d) An enclosure of the Report of Examination for Customs Entry was signed by Jim
          Daskalopoulos on August 29, 2003.

21. I returned from a trip to the Dixie Road Postal Sorting Station and found out that

approximately 30 packages were being held in customs of which Jim Daskalopoulos had

signed an order holding these. Neither my clients nor I had been informed that these

packages were being held.

22. Trueman Tuck wrote to Jim Daskalopoulos, a Supervisor with the Drug

Investigations HPFBI in Health Canada, and stated:

      (a) “Soft Seizure” is not an appropriate legal procedure under the legislation and can
          be argued to contravene not only my constitutional rights, but those of the 30 plus
          individuals whose packages were being held.
      (b) “Soft Seizure” can also be argued to be in violation of Section 337 of the Criminal
          Code.

23. On September 9, 2003, Trueman Tuck wrote to Jean-Marc Charron, Operations

Centre Manager of the Drug Investigations Unit with Health Canada, stating the

following:

(a)      Requesting an immediate release of my goods pending the meeting between,
         Trueman Tuck, myself, Jim Daskalopoulos and two other colleagues, asking for
         specific legal verification in writing of the status of my property.

(b)      Mr. Daskalopoulos indicated that a form 60-10 was being forwarded by mail to
         the importer. He advised that all other shipments were being stopped.

(c)      Mr. Daskalopoulos stated that it was departmental policy to increase regulatory
         enforcement with importers who refuse to comply with written demands, and as I
         had been corresponded with for over a year, I had been warned.

(d)      The original Food and Drugs Act legislation strongly limits the federal role and
         the junior officials‟ allegations of fraud and non-compliance are violating my
         constitutional rights. The officials have failed to charge me, yet they contact my
                                            Page 9


         customers, suppliers, US regulatory officials to interfere with my economic
         interests. They have stated to suppliers that I was “breaking the laws.”

24. Jean-Marc Charron, Operation Manager with Health Canada, responded stating the

following:

      (a) The requested release of copies of signed or issued documents by the officials
          may contain personal information as defined in section 3 of the Privacy Act.

      (b) An Access to Information request should be filed to ensure that any such records
          are appropriately released in accordance with the Access to Information Act and
          the Privacy Act.

      (c) Christie Canivel and Jim Daskalopoulos have acted entirely within their lawful
          authority.

      (d) As the matters in relation to which you seek a meeting are currently the subject of
          ongoing investigations, judicial review proceedings, or prosecutions, Health
          Canada is not of the view that it would be helpful at this time to meet with you as
          you proposed.

(B)      2004

25. On February 7, 2004, Trueman Tuck wrote to Sharon Merkley, a Compliance Officer

with Health Canada, stating:

      (a) Health Canada had been illegally interfering with BIE Health Products‟
          shipments, specifically signed by Sharon Merkley on December 17, 2003, January
          21, 2004 (x2), and January 28, 2004 (x3).

      (b) Health Canada‟s policy states, “The Food and Drug Act and Regulations do not
          regulate the importation of drugs for personal use unless the drugs sought to be
          imported are listed in Schedule F to the Regulations.” Further, “It has been the
          policy of the Health Products and Food Branch Inspectorate to permit individuals
          to import a three-month supply of a drug for their own personal use unless
          prohibited by law.”

      (c) Health Canada, via Sharon Merkley, on January 22, 2004, to Mr. & Mrs. Dennis
          Seber in Calgary, advising them, “GHR does not meet the requirements set out in
          the Food and Drugs Act and Regulations. As such, it is not authorized for sale in
          Canada,” and “Since GHR is not authorized for sale in Canada and because GHR
          is offered for sale, and orders are received for sale, in Canada, a recommendation
          has been made to the Canada Border Security Agency, formerly known as the
                                       Page 10


       Canada Customs and Revenue Agency that your package be refused entry into
       Canada.”

   (d) The product was approved by the FDA and manufactured in an approved facility
       in the U.S. and is classified as a “Dietary Supplement”, or “Therapeutic Food”
       under both the U.S. and Canadian Legislation.

   (e) There is no legislative foundation for the Personal Use Policy and therefore
       cannot be any violations under 9, A.01.040, C01.004, C.01, and C.01.014.

26. On February 18, 2004, Trueman Tuck wrote to Bobbie Chiu, a Compliance Officer

with Health Canada, stating:

   (a) Health Canada, via Bobby Chiu, continued to illegally interfere with BIE Health
       Products shipments, specifically, February 3, 2004 (x4) stating, “GHR/GHR-15
       does not meet the requirements set out in the FDA and NHPRs. As such, it is not
       authorized for sale in Canada,” and “In accordance with the NHPRs, prohibits the
       importation of a natural health product for sale in Canada, the sale of which in
       Canada would constitute a violation of the FDA or the NHPRs. Since
       GHR/GHR-15 is not authorized for sale in Canada and because GHR/GHR-15 is
       offered for sale, and orders are received for sale, in Canada, a recommendation
       has been made to the Canadian Border Security Agency, formerly known as the
       Canada Customs and Revenue Agency, that your package will be refused entry
       into Canada.”

   (b) Health Canada‟s policy states, “The Food and Drug Act and Regulations do not
       regulate the importation of drugs for personal use unless the drugs sought to be
       imported are listed in Schedule F to the Regulation.”

   (c) The scope of the PUED applies to all drugs in dosage form (including biologics)
       for human use only. It is a policy of the HPFBI to permit individuals to import a
       three months supply of a given drug for their own personal use, once during each
       quarter of the year.

27. On February 26, 2004, Trueman Tuck, wrote to Christie Canivel, a Compliance

Officer with Health Canada, stating no acknowledgement or response was received from

the February 7, 2004 letter.

28. On March 2, 2004, Colin Broughton, Regional Director with Health Canada,

responded stating:
                                         Page 11


   (a) The shipments of GHR/GHR-15 that have been recommended for refusal at
       Customs, since orders and payments are taken by BIE Health Products, we
       consider the sale of these products to occur in Canada and the importer to be BIE
       Health Products.

   (b) The shipments in question are imported by BIE Health Products and as such, the
       Health Products and Food Branch Inspecorate Importation of Human-Use Drugs
       for Personal Use Enforcement Directive does not apply.

29. On March 5, 2004, Trueman Tuck responded by stating:

   (a) They had been dealing with these matters for over 7 years.

   (b) He thought that at least the courtesy of a meeting would have occurred and that all
       harassment towards BIE Health Products would have been temporarily suspended
       pending the meeting.

   (c) Section A.01.044 has nothing to do with this matter legally, because Health
       Canada‟s staff exercise the most extreme criminal police powers available to any
       police enforcer in Canada and have not asserted any probable cause for criminal
       charges, nor laid any criminal charges, thus there is no violation of the legislation.

   (d) A Health Canada Compliance Officer, if they have solid probable cause alleging
       BIE Health Products is breaking the law pursuant to the Food and Drugs Act, do
       their duty and charge him or just back off.

   (e) Legally, these are USA manufactured products, FDA approved as “Dietary
       Supplements”, with no safety issues with the FDA, that are being shipped from
       the USA directly to the end user in Canada for personal consumption.

   (f) These products are legal foods in the country of origin, and there is no published
       policy on the personal importation of foods and beverages.

30. On June 9, 2004, Trueman Tuck wrote to Terry Swanek, Peter Diponio, and Robert

Burfield, with the Canadian Border Services Agency, the following:

   (a) Further to the meeting in August and September 2003 with BIE Health Products
       objecting to the officials interfering with personal use shipments addressed to
       individual Canadians of FDA approved dietary supplements from the USA
       warehouse.

   (b) We were still waiting for the office‟s finding in regards to the filed complaint on
       behalf of BIE Health Products and their Canadian clients.
                                         Page 12


   (c) This matter seemed to be resolved with shipments proceeding normally in
       October through December 2003. A recurrence in seizures began in December
       2003 with: 1 shipment in December 2003, 2 shipments in January 2004, 24 in
       February 2004, 215 in March 2004 and 27 in April 2004.

   (d) BIE Health Products was forced to terminate business activities to Canada as a
       direct result of the officials‟ illegal and unlawful interference.

31. Following Trueman Tuck‟s letters of March 8, 2004, March 18, 2004 and March 31,

2004 and his meeting with Alain Jolicoeur, President of Canada Border Services Agency,

he wrote on June 9, 2004 stating:

   (a) BIE Health Products was still waiting for the office‟s findings in regards to the
       complaint filed on behalf of BIE Health Products and his Canadian clients.

   (b) Global Health Products Inc.‟s business in Canada has now been 100% destroyed
       as a result of the continuing return of their personal use shipments of USA dietary
       supplements to addressed individual Canadians.

   (c) BIE Health Products need written confirmation that he can safely resume shipping
       as he is holding over $175,00 worth of new orders, plus have had over $250,000
       of orders that were returned and were forced to rebate funds for.

32. In July 9, 2009, Trueman Tuck had still not received a reply from his letter of June 9,

2004.

33. In a telephone conversation with Sylvia Fournier, of the Canada Border Service

Agency, on July 14, 2004, he was informed that the July 9, 2009 couriered package was

sent to an old address and it was tracked down and she would be responding to the letter

in approximately one week.

34. On July 26, 2004, J.A. Bradford, of O‟Flynn Weese Tausendfreund, wrote to the

Import Process Division stating:

   (a) On July 7, 2004, BIE Health Products was forwarded a letter from Buffalo, NY
       by way of the United States Postal Service. Affixed to the letter was a US Postal
       Services Custom Declaration describing the contents of the letter as documents
       with a value of $2.00;
                                        Page 13


   (b) In accordance with the Customs International Mail Processing System and the
       Customs Act, an Agency Inspector may not open any mail that weighs 30 grams
       or less, unless the addressee or sender gives authorization. The letter weighed
       less than 30 grams and no authorization was provided. BIE Health Products
       request justification to its opening the Letter without proper authorization;

   (c) The letter did not contain prohibited goods and should have been released
       immediately not requiring another governmental department or agency to review
       the document;

   (d) The letter contained no drug or food related items, but only documents, and there
       was no justification for forwarding the letter to Health Canada or any government
       department; and

   (e) The inspection label left on the letter by Health Canada, Inspector, Sharon
       Merkley, indicated the contents were not examined. However, it should have
       been clearly stamped “Examined” or “Released by Customs”.

35. On July 27, 2004, J.A. Bradford, of O‟Flynn Weese Tausendfreund, wrote to Jean-

Marc Charron, Operations Manager with Health Canada, stating:

   (a) Global receives requests for dietary supplements from Canadians via internet or
       telephone orders for Human-Use Drugs for Personal Use are adhered to.

   (b) In compliance, Global only ships a three-month supply of a dietary supplement to
       an individual and directly to their residences and only invoices them directly.
       Global does not and will not ship to commercial entities in Canada.

   (c) The Canadian Border Services Agency has deemed the exports to be commercial
       in nature and outside the boundaries of the Directive. The reason is unclear and
       no review of the agency‟s conclusion has been released to Global.

   (d) Global requests to convene a formal hearing to review the decision to exercise its
       enforcement powers to recommend to the Agency that it refuse entry of Global‟s
       dietary supplements into Canada.

36. On August 6, 2004, Jim Daskalopoulos, of Health Canada, spoke with Michael

Salvatori, of Imagination Plus, seeking his voluntary cooperation in withdrawing the

Internet services that pertain to the advertisement of GHR in regards to BIE Health

Products.
                                        Page 14


37. On August 19, 2004, J.A. Bradford, of O‟Flynn Weese Tausendfreund, requested a

hearing with Health Canada, Health Products & Food Branch Inspectorate, and the

Canada Border Services Agency to review the seizure of BIE Health Products GHR

product and enclosed a Canada Customs Adjustment Request.

38. On September 8, 2004, Jim Daskalopoulos, of Health Canada, wrote to me the

following:

   (a) Health Canada had previously communicated the requirements of a DIN before
       this product can be marketed in Canada.

   (b) BIE Health Products is requested to cease and desist sale of this product until
       market authorization is obtained.

   (c) Health Canada has concerns regarding the ingredients, particularly, pituitary
       (bovine source) and hypothalamus. Different types of animal-sourced materials
       obtained from animals infected with Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy
       (TSE) will possess varying levels of infectivity.

   (d) An assessment to support the safety of identified animal-sourced materials with
       respect to TSE is requested.

39. I responded to Jim Daskalopoulos on September 13, 2004 the following:

   (a) A certificate of analysis for bovine content was included.

   (b) According to FDA website, the source Argentina is specified as a non-BSE
       country.

   (c) The request for information assessment is non-applicable due to the above
       qualifications and lack of any stated regulations.

   (d) To pre-empt any future perceived risk, porcine biologics is now available in
       substitution pending cooperation with your department.

40. On September 22, 2004, J.A. Bradford, of O‟Flynn Weese Tausendfreund, to the

Canadian Border Services Agency the following:

   (a) The refusal of BIE Health Products was based on Health Canada.
                                          Page 15


   (b) Health Canada indicates they have the ability to recommend refusal, but the actual
       decision to refuse is that of the Canada Border Services Agency, therefore any
       appeal of that decision must flow through their appeal system.

   (c) Health Canada has determined the shipment of certain natural health products
       were commercial in nature and therefore any appeal in regard to their turn back
       again fell to the Canada Border Services Agency.

41. On October 4, 2004, Jean-Marc Charron, of Health Canada, wrote to J.A. Bradford,

of O‟Flynn Weese Tausendfreund, that Health Products and Food Branch Inspectorate

may convene a formal hearing to achieve compliance with legislative requirements.

However, the Inspectorate is not convening a formal hearing since they are concerned

with the activities of the Canadian importer of GHR, BIE Health Products Inc. and may

consider a meeting with the company.

42. On October 8, 2004, J.A. Bradford, of O‟Flynn Weese Tausendfreund, wrote to Jean-

Marc Charron, of Health Canada, the following:

   (a) He acted for Global and not the company named BIE Health Products. Global
       does not export any items to BIE Health Products but directly to individuals in
       Canada.

   (b) As the Inspectorate is rejecting Global‟s request for a formal hearing, Global
       requests that the Inspectorate implement its internal appeal process to facilitate a
       resolution of Global‟s concerns.

   He further wrote in a second letter:

   (a) There were numerous copies of reports for custom entry wherein Global is
       properly named as the exporter, but the name and address of the individual
       importer is, placed in the product description box.

   (b) The importer is being named BIE Health Products and Global does not sell any
       products to BIE Health Products.

43. On November 1, 2004, Pierre Richard, of the Canada Border Services Agency, wrote

to J.A. Bradford, of O‟Flynn Weese Tausendfreund, stating:
                                         Page 16


   (a) The goods were refused entry into Canada on the basis that they did not meet
       requirements of the Food and Drug Act.

   (b) Health Canada is responsible for the administration and the Canada Border
       Services Agency enforces the act at the border based on the recommendations
       made by Health Canada.

   (c) As the goods were returned to the exporter, no decision or enforcement action was
       taken by the Canada Border Services Agency under the Customs Act so there is no
       authority for the CBSA to review your case.

44. On November 5, 2004, Jim Daskalopoulos, of Health Canada, wrote to me the

following:

   (a) A health hazard assessment on GHR has been completed by Health Canada and
       the product is deemed to be of a Type I Health Hazard, meaning there is
       reasonable probability that the use of, or exposure to, a product will cause serious
       adverse health consequences or death.

   (b) The specific risk is that a patient will stop conventional human growth hormone
       (HGH) therapy and only consume the product.

   (c) There is no evidence that HGH is effective when administered orally, so
       consumers may not receive any therapeutic benefits from the product.

   (d) Any disease requiring HGH therapy are serious diseases which require specialized
       diagnosis therapy and followed up by specifically trained physicians. A public
       warning will be issued by Health Canada.

   (e) BIE Health Products sells the product to Canadian residents importing the product
       from the US. BIE is considered the importer. It is also known that BIE is
       shipping the product from Ontario to its customers within Canada.

   (f) GHR has been classified as a Biological Drug due to the Pituitary extracts listed
       in Schedule D and the listed drug benefits for GHR, mostly amounting to
       therapeutic claims.

   (g) Confirm before November 10, 2004, to cease the sale of GHR, provide a
       corrective action plan addressing the violations, and the quantity of GHR
       currently in BIE‟s possession.
                                        Page 17


45. On November 17, 2004, J.A. Bradford, of O‟Flynn Weese Tausendfreund, wrote to

Scarlett Russell, Senior Program Officer with the Canada Border Services Agency, the

following:

   (a) Health Canada only provides recommendations to the Canada Border Services
       Agency, but they do not have the power to enforce these recommendations.

   (b) Canada Border Services Agency through the Customs Act has the authority and
       power to refuse the goods. He disagreed that there was no “enforcement action”
       taken by the CBSA under the Customs Act.

   (c) Is it correct to assume the CBSA does not consider or review requests from other
       agencies before it exercises its statutory power?

   (d) When the CBSA exercises power under the Customs Act, that exercise of power
       must be subject to a form of administrative appeal.

46. On November 18, 2004, J.A. Bradford, of O‟Flynn Weese Tausendfreund, wrote to

   Jim Daskalopoulos, of Health Canada, to provide more details on what was the basis

   for their allegations and what prompted such a response.

47. A meeting was scheduled with Health Canada, via Jim Daskalopoulos, for December

7, 2004, however, Mr. Beemer, of BIE Health Products, was unable to attend and

Trueman Tuck, through Power of Attorney, would speak at the meeting.

48. Following the meeting of December 7, 2004 with Health Canada, BIE Health

Products on January 10, 2004, through Trueman Tuck, that he refused to cooperate

voluntarily with an unsubstantiated request or demand of the officials. The product is a

food and should be referred to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency for border access

review. He disputed that he physically imports any product for sale and disputed their

conclusions that legally he can be deemed to be an importer for commercial purposes.
                                           Page 18


(C)      2005

49. On January 10, 2005, Trueman Tuck wrote to the Appeals Unit of the Canada Border

Services Agency requesting a confirmation of a formal hearing and in the meantime, the

agency would not stop and return any more shipments.

50. On January 17, 2005, Henry Peters, an Appeal Officer with the Canada Border

Services Agency, forwarded the letter to the Trade Disputes Policy Section.

51. On February 15, 2005, Craig Turner, Director with the Canada Border Services

Agency, wrote to J.A. Bradford, of O‟Flynn Weese Tausendfreund, the CBSA assists in

the administration of the Food and Drugs Act at the border on recommendations made by

Health Canada. The CBSA does not vet the recommendations of Health Canada in

determining compliance with the Food and Drug Act as they have neither the technical

expertise nor legislative responsibility for making such a determination. There is no

legislative mechanism available under the Customs Act when goods have been retained

under section 101 and exported from Canada.

52. On February 17, 2005, Christie Canivel, a Compliance Officer with Health Canada,

replied to Trueman Tuck explaining the Health Hazard Assessment procedure and the

usage of a numerical designation to indicate the hazard classification relative to the health

hazard of the product. The letter included their full report dated February 1, 2005.

53. On April 6, 2005, Robert Neil, Acting, Regional Director with Health Canada, wrote

to me the following:

      (a) Replying to the letter of March 7, 2005 of Trueman Tuck.

      (b) BIE‟s intention not to comply with the request to cease and desist importation and
          sale of GHR/GHR-15 product in Canada.
                                        Page 19


   (c) Health Canada has previously denied the request for a formal hearing being that
       GHR/GHR-15 is a new drug product requiring a new drug submission and
       marketing authorization (DIN) before importing or selling in Canada.

   (d) Prosecution of the tools used by Health Canada to protect and enhance the health
       of Canadians may be considered.

   (e) BIE is considered the importer of GHR/GHR-15 and Importation of Human-Use
       Drugs for Personal Use Enforcement does not apply.

   (f) Health Canada will not change its position with regard to the status of
       GHR/GHR-15.

54. On April 15, 2005, Trueman Tuck wrote to the Border Compliance and Monitoring

Division of the Canada Border Services Agency requesting the status of their response to

BIE‟s letter of January 17, 2005. No response was received on April 24, 2005.

55. On May 12, 2005, Scarlett Russell, of the Canada Border Services Agency, wrote to

Trueman Tuck stating that the letter of April 15, 2005 was being forwarded to the Trade

Disputes and Policy Section.

56. On June 7, 2005, Jim Daskalopoulos, of Health Canada, wrote to me that the enclosed

Public Warning would be posted on Health Canada‟s website, “Health Canada Warns

Consumers Not to Use Human Growth Hormone Drug Called GHR-15.”

57. On June 26, 2005, Trueman Tuck wrote to Robert Neil, Regional Director with

Health Canada, to either lay criminal charges on BIE Health Products or discontinue

harassing particularly when the new Natural Health Product Regulations had never been

properly pre-cleared.

58. On June 25, 2005, Trueman Tuck wrote to the Trade Disputes Section of the Canada

Border Services Agency requesting the status on the response to his previous letters of

which were forwarded.
                                          Page 20


59. No response had been received from Robert Neil, Regional Director of Health

Canada, as of July 5, 2005 following letters dated June 24, 2005 and April 6, 2005.

60. I issued a Notice of Libel in July 2005 making the defendants aware that I considered

the June 10, 2005 Press Release to be defamatory and provided them every opportunity to

rescind, apologize or allow me equal opportunity to provide my side for a fair and proper

coverage of the issue.

PRESENT DAY

61. BIE Health Products have been held up to ridicule, contempt and disrespect in the

eyes of the public, clients and potential clients due to the defamatory broadcasts.

62. I believe that the actions of the defendants constitute a callous and flagrant disregard

of my rights.

63. I make this affidavit in support of the Application and for no other improper purpose.



SWORN BEFORE ME THIS ______                   )
DAY OF _______________, 2009                  )
AT THE CITY OF ________________               )
IN THE PROVINCE OF ____________               )
                                              )
                                              )
________________________________              )       ______________________________
A commissioner, etc.                                        RICHARD BEEMER

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:31
posted:11/13/2011
language:English
pages:20