A company which operates pharmacies that sell medical cannabis demanded that the Ministry of Health and the Cannabis Products Unit reverse their decision to deny the company its license to sell cannabis.
The Court held that the decision to deny the license to sell cannabis was reasonable under the circumstances and there is no reason to interfere with it. A decision of an administrative authority deviates from the scope of reasonableness only in the event that it was given in excess of authority, by relying on foreign considerations, is arbitrarily or was made using discriminatory practices. As long as the administrative decision is essentially a decision which a reasonable administrative authority was entitled to make, there is no room for the Court to intervene in such a decision, and this applies even more when such a decision is based on the recommendation of a professional entity. Here, in the audits carried out at the pharmacies, the Cannabis unit found many irregularities in the conduct of the pharmacy and the pharmacist justifying the unit's decision to revoke the license. The company was duly heard and its claims were fully reviewed, despite the fact that the hearing was conducted in writing and not orally and the committee's decision was made in a reasonable manner and in accordance with procedures, from relevant considerations and without evidence of arbitrary or selective enforcement. Thus, there is no room for the Court's intervention in the administrative Authority's decision.