VANCOUVER, British Columbia (LifeSiteNews) – A British Columbia appeals court agreed to once again hear a court case that will take a close look at whether COVID vaccine passports were legally valid in a case involving two women injured from a first dose of the COVID shot and another not able to get it for medical reasons.
Justices from the British Columbia Court of Appeal in a hearing on October 6 said that there is something to be “gained by having this court consider the issue and provide some guidance.”
The justices wrote that at issue is whether the “Section 7 right to liberty includes a right to roam as some of the parties have put it is an important one.”
The case was initiated by the Canadian Constitution Federation (CCF) on behalf of three women who claim the province’s vaccine passport system, which was in place for a time from late 2021 to late October 2022, caused them harm.
The women had claimed that they could not get the COVID shots for medical reasons. However, they were deemed to be not eligible for an exemption from the mandates as their medical conditions were not on a government list. They argued the provincial vaccine passport system in place at the time that prevented the jab free from entering many places, as well as work at others, prevented them from participating in society and working as normal.
Two of the women had severe reactions after getting one dose of the COVID shot and thus did not get additional jabs.
The first was a teenage girl who developed heart inflammation after the first shot. The second was a woman who was partially paralyzed after getting the jab. The third woman suffered from chronic medical issues and said she could not get the shot.
In 2022, the CCF lost the case but later appealed.
At that time, Chief Justice Christopher Hinkson ruled that the found the three women “have not exhausted the remedies available to them under the legislative scheme.”
“Had they pursued those remedies, the alternative procedures would not have been duplicative or ineffective,” he noted.
CCF litigation director Christine Van Geyn noted in a recent press release that her group believes “that there were errors in the lower court decision.”
“Most significantly, there was an error in the finding that the three women who brought this case could have applied for a reconsideration for an exemption from the vaccine passport system, making their court challenge premature,” she said.
When it came to the appeal, the court was considering whether to rule the case as moot, as the vaccine passports are no longer in place. However, the court decided on day three of the hearing to again hear the case.
Representatives for the Attorney General’s office had claimed to the court that the vaccine passport orders “expired over 17 months ago now and have not been replaced.”
As it stands now, no Canadian province has a COVID vaccine passport program in place, but health authorities in British Columbia recently reintroduced a mask mandate in healthcare settings. The province still mandates healthcare workers to have the COVID jabs.
Geoffrey Trotter, the lawyer for the three women, said the case was important for the general “public interest.”
COVID vaccine mandates, which came from provincial governments with the support of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s federal government, split Canadian society. The mRNA shots themselves have been linked to a multitude of negative and often severe side effects in children.
The jabs also have connections to cell lines derived from aborted babies. As a result of this, many Catholics and other Christians refused to take them.
Last month, Health Canada approved a revised Moderna mRNA-based COVID shot despite research showing that 1 in 35 recipients of the booster have myocardial damage.
Adverse effects from the first round of COVID shots have resulted in a growing number of Canadians who have filed for financial compensation over alleged injuries from the jabs through Canada’s Vaccine Injury Program (VISP).
Thus far, VISP has paid over $6 million to those injured from COVID injections, with 2,000 claims remaining to be settled.