Consequently, the convicted parties had no opportunity to adequately respond and as a result the issue was not fully argued.
 Nor is it clear that reading down is an appropriate remedy
in this case. Reading down is “warranted only in the clearest of
cases” where ( i) the legislative objective is obvious, ( ii) reading
down would not constitute an unacceptable intrusion in the legislative domain and ( iii) the remedy would not intrude upon
budgetary considerations: Schachter v. Canada,  2 S.C.R.
679,  S.C.J. No. 68, at para. 87.
 Given that the requested words were included in
s. 7(2)(b)( i) and ( ii), but not in the subsequent subsections,
I think it far from obvious that inserting them would reflect Parliament’s intention.
 It is also far from obvious that reading down is generally
an appropriate remedy for unconstitutional mandatory mini-
mums. As noted by the Supreme Court in Ferguson, at para. 36:
The usual remedy for a mandatory sentencing provision that imposes
cruel and unusual punishment contrary to s.12 of the Charter is a declara-
tion that the law is of no force and effect under s. 52 of the Constitution
(See, also, Nur and Lloyd, where the Supreme Court struck
down the infringing mandatory minimums.)
 Moreover, I am not convinced that the Crown’s proposed
reading down would resolve the gross disproportionality arising
from the hypotheticals considered in Serov and McGee.
 For these reasons, I would not give effect to the Crown’s
 As the Crown confirmed at the oral hearing that it was
not seeking an increased penalty for Ms. Pham if it was unsuccessful in its constitutional arguments, it is unnecessary that
I address the Crown’s argument in its factum in that regard.
 In the result, based on the foregoing reasons, leave to
appeal sentence is granted, but the Pham sentence appeal
F. The Vu Appeals (1,020 Plants)
 Mr. Vu was arrested on November 22, 2012, after police
executed a search warrant at a house in Brampton and found
1,020 marijuana plants, approximately 70 kilograms of wet
marijuana and a hydro bypass in the home. They also found
Mr. Vu hiding in the laundry dryer.
 Mr. Vu pleaded guilty to production of marijuana and to
theft of electricity over $5,000 on May 5, 2014.
 As I have said, Mr. Vu challenged the constitutional validity of the two and three-year mandatory minimum sentences