The Litigator LiveThe Litigator Live
AGM :: Affleck Greene McMurtry LLP

THE LITIGATOR LIVE

Affleck Greene McMurtry LLP
365 Bay Street, Suite 200  ·  Toronto, Canada
416 360 2800  ·  info@agmlawyers.com

price fixing

Canadian Plaintiffs Acheive a Breakthrough in Certifying Price Fixing Class Actions

August 26th, 2010 | By Michael Osborne | Posted in Class Actions and Other Private Actions, Competition Law

Courts in two Canadian cases have recently made it easier to certify direct and indirect-purchaser class actions seeking damages for alleged price fixing. Formerly, the difficulty of proving damages suffered by indirect purchasers on a class-wide basis was a major impediment…

Full article

Complex Distribution Chain Kills DRAM Class Action – Pro-Sys Consultants Ltd. v. Infineon Technologies AG

April 7th, 2009 | By Michael Osborne | Posted in Class Actions and Other Private Actions, Competition Law

A proposed class action by purchasers of electronic goods containing DRAM memory chips would degenerate into a series of individual trials, the British Columbia Supreme Court has held in Pro-Sys Consultants Ltd. v. Infineon Technologies AG.2 Key issues, including whether the plaintiffs paid more because of price-fixing by manufacturers of the chips, could not be determined on a class-wide basis. The court thus refused to certify the action as a class proceeding.

Full article

AGO contributes to ABA handbook

May 15th, 2007 | By Michael Osborne | Posted in Class Actions and Other Private Actions, Competition Law

Many Canadian class actions alleging price fixing conspiracies are run parallel to similar US class actions. As a result, this handbook will be useful to Canadian lawyers seeking to understand how the US class action system deals with issues surrounding indirect purchasers.

Full article

Joint venturers not liable for price fixing

March 8th, 2006 | By Michael Osborne | Posted in Competition Law, Criminal Matters

It is not per se illegal for a lawful, economically integrated joint venture to set prices at which the joint venture sells products, the US Supreme Court held in a February 28, 2006 , decision.

Full article

Competition Law Update – 2005 Year in Review

March 5th, 2006 | By Michael Osborne | Posted in Competition Law, Year in Review / The Litigator (Print Edition)

Contributors: Michael Osborne , Jennifer Cantwell, Paul Emerson, Angela Yadav, Sonny Ingram, and Michael Binetti

TOP STORIES
Rona keeps Sherbrooke store
In May, the Competition Tribunal rescinded a September 2003 consent agreement, allowing home improvement retailer Rona Inc. to keep the Sherbrooke , Quebec store it agreed to sell to gain Bureau approval of its acquisition of Réno-Dépot. The Tribunal found that Home Depot’s imminent arrival was a change in the circumstances that led to the consent agreement, and that the agreement would not have been made in the present circumstances. The Tribunal rejected the Commissioner’s arguments that it should refuse to rescind the agreement as a matter of discretion.

The Tribunal’s decision is the first time that the Competition Act’s variation / rescission provision (s. 106) has been applied to a consent agreement. Because consent agreements are negotiated and made by the parties, not the Tribunal, the Tribunal must look to the intentions of the parties. The Tribunal also emphasized that the Commissioner must be responsive to changing circumstances.

Full article

Affleck Greene McMurtry LLP
365 Bay Street, Suite 200  ·  Toronto, Canada
416 360 2800  ·  
.