A naturopath "prescribed" various herbs, vitamins and supplements for the treatment of the taxpayers' myalgic encephalomyelitis, chronic fatigue and immune dysfunction syndrome, multiple chemical sensitivity, and fibromyalgia. Ryers JA upheld the Tax Court's denial of the taxpayers' resulting claim for medical expense tax credits. Contrary to s. 118.2(2)(n), the items in question could be lawfully obtained without a prescription.
Ryers JA dismissed the taxpayer's argument that this constituted discrimination. Auton, [2004] 3 S.C.R. 657, establishes that there is nothing discriminatory in a legislative choice not to accord a particular benefit, unless that choice has a discriminatory purpose, policy or effect (paras. 13-14). There was no directly discriminatory purpose in Parliament's decision to restrict METCs to the specific items permitted under s. 1