Introduction The so-called “reviewable matters”[1] are a collection of provisions in the Competition Act[2] (the “Act”) that allow the Competition Tribunal (the “Tribunal”) to order remedies for various situations that can harm competition. Although these provisions are quite disparate, they share some important characteristics. First, they are all civil in nature. This means that civil, [...]

Full article

by Michael Osborne, Jennifer Cantwell, Paul Emerson, and Angela Yadav TOP STORIES Tread carefully when advertising “sale” prices: In January 2005, the Tribunal ruled that Sears Canada Inc. exaggerated savings in ads for tires. The “regular” prices advertised by Sears were not genuine and bona fide because Sears sold less than 2% of the tires [...]

Full article

Bibby, a division of Canada Pipe, dominates the market for cast iron drain, waste and vent pipes. Its rebate program encourages its customers to stock its products exclusively. But Bibby’s rebate program is not anti-competitive, and thus Bibby did not abuse its dominant position, the Competition Tribunal ruled in a decision released in February, 2005.

Full article

On January 24, 2005 , the Competition Tribunal determined that Sears Canada Inc. violated the ordinary selling price provisions of the Competition Act (subsection 74.01(3)).[1] In light of the recent success of the Competition Bureau in obtaining hefty administrative monetary penalties (“AMP”) under the ordinary selling price provisions, and the Bureau’s controversial non-binding Guidelines on [...]

Full article

Canadian Waste Services has appealed the latest Tribunal decision in its long-running merger case to the Federal Court of Appeal. On June 28, 2004, the Competition Tribunal rejected CWS “change of circumstances” application that sought to rescind the Tribunal’s October 2001, order that it sell the Ridge landfill. The Tribunal made that order after concluding that CWS’ acquisition of the Ridge would substantially lessen and prevent competition.

Full article