OTTAWA - The Supreme Court of Canada has rejected a bid by thousands of women to sue Health Canada for negligence after ruptured breast implants leaked silicon into their bodies.

Toronto lawyer Kirk Baert, representing about 30,000 women, had hoped to argue that Health Canada had a duty to test, ban, recall or at least warn people about the faulty devices.

The top court, as is usual practice, gave no reasons Thursday for refusing to hear the case.

A separate action brought by thousands of patients who received flawed jaw implants, also represented by Baert, was dismissed as well.

Baert said the legal dead end should be a wake-up call for patients who put their trust in regulators like Health Canada.

"When the federal government makes a mistake with respect to a device, the patients suffer and the provincial health authorities end up paying the bills -- which can be colossal -- associated with treating and caring for that person," he said.

"So it's not a good day for them either. The federal government has a monopoly on regulating these devices, but when they make a mistake it's other people who pay -- not them."

The high court's refusal to hear the cases in effect affirms lower courts that also threw them out.

Justice Warren Winkler, then of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, ruled in 2007 that the proposed breast implant class action essentially accused Ottawa of failing to govern by not passing regulations to ban the silicon gel products.

Federal Justice Department lawyers cited an already "sky-high" regulatory regime. And they argued that the Food and Drugs Act, which prohibits sale of a device that causes harm through normal use, puts the onus clearly on manufacturers -- not the government.

Baert twice lost in lower courts but had hoped the high court would see pressing implications in product injuries affecting patients across Canada.

"If the manufacturer is bankrupt or out of business or you don't know who made the device that's been put into your body -- which the federal government could have prevented -- then you're still not allowed to sue (the government)."

The lead plaintiff in the jaw implant case couldn't sue the manufacturer because the device wasn't properly labelled and couldn't later be traced when it malfunctioned, Baert said.

"If the manufacturers don't do their jobs and provide safe products, and the federal government doesn't stop them from doing that, then it strikes me as a situation that patients should worry about."

Joyce Attis, president of the support group Breast Implant Line of Canada, had a Dow Corning implant inserted in 1972 when she was 21 because her right breast never developed.

Now 58, Attis is on 12 to 14 different drugs to ease chronic pain from lupus, fibromyalgia and other ailments she blames on the ruptured device. Her implant began to leak when she was 27 and was later removed.

Attis says she is especially dismayed that two of the three high court judges that dismissed the case Thursday are women.

"Women justices should be interested in justice for women."

Attis noted that silicon gel implants, banned in Canada from 1992 to 2006, are back on the market.

"I would like to warn the women of Canada and their families to thoroughly check each and every medical device and medicine that they are ever prescribed -- do their own research and check everything out on their own. Health Canada is not to be trusted.

"I'm very saddened not just for the women but for the lawyers who invested nine years in this case, which didn't come to fruition, through no fault of their own."

Attis says she was never interested in collecting cash damages.

"I wanted Health Canada to admit that they allowed faulty medical devices on the market. Money is not going to buy back my health. It's not going to buy back the life I deserved but did not get to live."

Dow Corning breast implants remained in use from 1969 until 1992 despite studies showing they were prone to rupture. The company was sued by patients across the U.S. and Canada.