Supporters of the lawsuit decried what they saw as a dangerous mandate that contributed to a problem of long waits for public care without consideration for urgency.
The defendants' advocates argued that the lawsuit did not rise to the level of a constitutional question and that a ruling in plaintiffs' favour would do long-lasting damage to Canada's public healthcare system that would far outweigh the problems it purported to solve.
[11][12] The plaintiffs argued that British Columbia's Medicare Protection Act (MPA) violated the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, because it forbids private providers from directly charging patients enrolled in the public system for any service that can be accessed in that system and does not permit exceptions for urgency.
[14] It ended on September 10, 2020 when presiding justice John J. Steeves, a judge on the Supreme Court of British Columbia, issued an 880-page ruling in favour of the defendants.
[9] A week before he issued his decision, Steeves predicted that no matter the outcome, inevitable appeals would mean the Supreme Court of Canada would make the case's final ruling.
[17] The Supreme Court of Canada declined to hear the case, dismissing the application for leave to appeal made by Cambie Surgeries Corporation.