Category: Competition & Antitrust

Page: 3 of 6Page 3 de 612345...>>>

Risks of Competition Litigation: Being Aware and Being Prepared

June 14, 2016

Litigation arising from competition law issues now has the potential to affect all businesses operating in Canada. It is no longer confined to those unfortunate enough to be the subject of a Competition Bureau merger or abuse of dominance challenge — or, worse yet, a cartel or bid-rigging investigation. The scope of risk has expanded to include Bureau claims related…

Competition Tribunal Rescinds Ebooks Consent Agreement, Clarifies Substantive Requirements

June 13, 2016

KEY TAKEAWAYS:   The Competition Tribunal (Tribunal) requires that consent agreements disclose the basis of the conduct being remedied and the remedy’s rationale. The Tribunal confirms a previous holding that mere allegations of unlawful conduct are insufficient. The Commissioner must conclude that conduct contravenes the Competition Act. The decision will mean greater transparency from the settlement process. On June 10,…

Competition Bureau Launches FinTech Market Study

May 25, 2016

On May 19, 2016, the Competition Bureau (Bureau) announced that it has launched a market study into technology led innovation in the Canadian financial services industry (FinTech); FinTech was identified as a subject matter of interest at the Bureau’s workshop on emerging competition issues held in January 2016. The study raises important considerations not only for FinTech companies, but for…

Made in Canada: Competition Bureau Takes Action Against Moose Knuckles

May 4, 2016

On April 26, 2016, the Competition Bureau (Bureau) filed a Notice of Application (Application) against Moose International Inc. (Moose Knuckles), for alleged false or misleading “Made in Canada” claims in relation to its premium winter jackets. The Bureau is seeking, among other remedies, C$4-million in administrative monetary penalties (AMPs) as well as restitution for Moose Knuckles customers. This Application is…

Competition Tribunal Finds Toronto Real Estate Board Engaged in Abuse of Dominance

May 2, 2016

SUMMARY Last week, the Competition Tribunal (Tribunal) issued a summary of its decision in the Commissioner of Competition’s (Commissioner) long-running abuse of dominance case against the Toronto Real Estate Board. This case has broadened the scope of the type of conduct that can constitute an “abuse of dominance” under Canadian law, but the limits of what constitutes abusive conduct have…

Legal Newsletter: Saudi and Global Competition Law

April 27, 2016

It is our pleasure to introduce to you our Legal Newsletter’s first issue of 2016, which focuses on Competition Law in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, as well as global competition law, to keep our clients and readers abreast of the latest developments in the different areas of the law. Competition is an essential economic driver for any nation, as it contributes…

Important Developments in Canadian Merger Control and IP Matters

April 4, 2016

KEY TAKEAWAYS The Competition Bureau (Bureau) has obtained a significant remedy in a merger between non-Canadian companies that was not notifiable in Canada. Parties to non-Canadian transactions must keep in mind that the Bureau retains the ability to conduct a review of, and threaten to challenge non-notifiable transactions. A merger the Bureau was challenging before the Competition Tribunal was settled…

Benchmark Risk: Emerging Challenges and Lessons Learned

March 1, 2016

Regulators around the world have shown an increased focus on alleged benchmark manipulation. Proposed legislative and regulatory changes designed to address benchmark-related misconduct could be in place as early as fall 2016. With a continuously evolving regulatory environment, and in the wake of multiple recent global regulatory investigations into alleged benchmark manipulation, Canadian businesses and institutions need to understand what…

Competition Tribunal Refuses Private Litigant in Refusal to Deal Case

January 7, 2016

The Canadian Competition Tribunal (Tribunal) issued its reasons for denying an application in a recent “refusal to deal” case. The case, Audatex Canada, ULC v. CarProof Corporation, is notable because it emphasizes the need for private litigants to present “non-speculative, cogent evidence” at the very outset of their case. SUMMARY Audatex, a supplier of automotive data to insurance companies, sought…

Page: 3 of 6Page 3 de 612345...>>>