<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Litigator - Affleck Greene McMurtry, LLP &#187; Competition Tribunal Litigation</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/category/competition-law/competition-tribunal-litigation/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thelitigator.ca</link>
	<description>Competition Law and Commercial Litigation Updates</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Aug 2010 16:24:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Competition Tribunal Cases: A Two Year Review</title>
		<link>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2009/07/17/competition-tribunal-cases-a-two-year-review/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2009/07/17/competition-tribunal-cases-a-two-year-review/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Jul 2009 03:19:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael Osborne</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Competition Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Competition Tribunal Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[abuse of dominance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canada Pipe Company]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Competition Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Competition Tribunal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nadeau]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polar Ice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[private applications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rebate program]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Saskatchewan Wheet Pool]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelitigator.ca/?p=445</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In the last two years, there have been no abuse of dominance cases and one contested merger case, which was dropped. Recently, however, amendments to the Competition Act transfer jurisdiction over some anti-competitive agreements and price maintenance to the Tribunal. 

This article reviews the cases in the Tribunal over the last two years and the recent amendments to the Competition Act, as they affect practice in the Tribunal.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2009/07/17/competition-tribunal-cases-a-two-year-review/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Online payment company seeks resumption of banking services</title>
		<link>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2005/11/02/online-payment-company-seeks-resumption-of-banking-services/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2005/11/02/online-payment-company-seeks-resumption-of-banking-services/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2005 02:26:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael Osborne</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Competition Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Competition Tribunal Litigation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelitigator.ca/?p=161</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p><em>B-Filer Inc. v. The Bank of </em><em>Nova Scotia</em><a class="footnotelink" href="#_edn1" name="_ednref1">[1]</a></p>
<p>In October 2005, the Tribunal dismissed Scotiabank&#8217;s motion for summary disposition of B-Filer&#8217;s application for leave to commence a <a href="http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/tag/private-application/" class="st_tag internal_tag" rel="tag nofollow" title="Posts tagged with private application">private application</a>. The Tribunal disagreed with Scotiabank&#8217;s contention that an Alberta court&#8217;s refusal to&#8230;</p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2005/11/02/online-payment-company-seeks-resumption-of-banking-services/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Shell corporation cannot bring application, Tribunal rule</title>
		<link>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2005/11/02/shell-corporation-cannot-bring-application-tribunal-rule/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2005/11/02/shell-corporation-cannot-bring-application-tribunal-rule/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2005 02:09:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael Osborne</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Commercial Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Competition Tribunal Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[barcode systems inc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court of appeal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal court of appeal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[private application]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[refusal to deal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[shell corporation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[summary disposition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[symbol technologies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tribunal]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelitigator.ca/?p=157</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p class="lithead" align="left"><em><a href="http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/tag/symbol-technologies/" class="st_tag internal_tag" rel="tag nofollow" title="Posts tagged with symbol technologies">Symbol Technologies</a> </em><em><a href="http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/tag/canada/" class="st_tag internal_tag" rel="tag nofollow" title="Posts tagged with canada">Canada</a></em><em> ULC v. <a href="http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/tag/barcode-systems-inc/" class="st_tag internal_tag" rel="tag nofollow" title="Posts tagged with barcode systems inc">Barcode Systems Inc</a>.</em><a class="footnotelink" href="#_edn1" name="_ednref1">[1]</a></p>
<p>A corporation that is no longer a going concern cannot maintain a <a href="http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/tag/private-application/" class="st_tag internal_tag" rel="tag nofollow" title="Posts tagged with private application">private application</a> under s. 75, the Tribunal held in October 2005.</p>
<p>In early 2004, the Tribunal granted Winnipeg bar code equipment seller <a href="http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/tag/barcode-systems-inc/" class="st_tag internal_tag" rel="tag nofollow" title="Posts tagged with barcode systems inc">Barcode Systems Inc</a>.leave&#8230;</p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thelitigator.ca/index.php/2005/11/02/shell-corporation-cannot-bring-application-tribunal-rule/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
