Contributors: Michael Osborne, Sonny Ingram, Jennifer Dyck, and Christian Farahat.

Review of all Canadian Competition Law developments over the last 12 months, plus some US and EU developments, including: Mergers, Criminal, Private Actions, Reviewable Matters, Marketing Practices, The Long Arm of US Antitrust, Across the Pond

Top Stories

• Hard time for hard core cartels
• Class action requirements loosened
• Suncor – Petro-Canada merger gets green light
• Nadeau’s feathers ruffled by Tribunal

Full article

In a recent decision, a five judge panel of the Court of Appeal for Ontario revised the legal test to be applied when the Ontario courts are asked to assume jurisdiction over a foreign defendant. The Court’s decision in Van Breda v. Village Resorts Ltd. clarifies the applicable legal principles and should provide greater guidance to Ontario courts on whether and when they can properly take jurisdiction over foreign defendants.

Full article

In its decision released earlier this year in Rosenhek v. Windsor Regional Hospital,[i] the Court of Appeal for Ontario affirmed a $3 million judgment awarded to a doctor in his action against a hospital arising from the denial of hospital privileges to him. The Court concluded that the hospital’s Board of Governors had acted in bad faith in summarily revoking the doctor’s hospital privileges primarily because he didn’t “fit in” with his fellow staff members.

Full article

In a pair of decisions released the same day, Justice Katherine van Rensburg of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice became the first judge to consider the statutory remedy created under section 138.3 of the Ontario Securities Act (the “Act”) for shareholders of public companies who suffer damages from public company misrepresentations on the secondary securities market in documents such as annual financial statements and other public documents.

Full article

In its decision released last Fall in Davy Estate v. CIBC World Markets Inc. , the Ontario Court of Appeal affirmed an Ontario Superior Court order striking out a third party claim in which the defendant had tried to sue the plaintiff’s lawyer. The third party claim had alleged that the plaintiff’s lawyer had given the plaintiff bad advice on the mitigation of her damages. In addition to finding that the third party claim against the plaintiff’s lawyer could not succeed at law, the Court of Appeal also cited policy reasons against permitting one party to sue another party’s lawyer for alleged negligence; noting that such claims undermine a lawyer’s loyalty to their client and invade the sanctity of the lawyer-client relationship.

Full article