Canadian "medical necessity" and the right to health.

Abstract

In this article, Kathryn Garforth examines legal claims to health care in South Africa and Canada. Both countries face rising costs of health care that put a great strain on publicly funded systems, albeit in radically different contexts. Kathryn argues that despite these differences there are similarities in how litigants in South Africa and Canada have framed their claims to healthcare services, in how governments have responded, and in the factors courts have analyzed in reaching decisions. In South Africa, the leading case is Treatment Action Campaign (TAC) et al v Minister of Health et al, a constitutional challenge, while in Canada the relevant jurisprudence concerns the interpretation of the concept of medical necessity, articulated for the most part in non-constitutional cases.