Archive for March, 2012
Chillin’ Competition in Belgium, who have one of the most stylish competition blogs on the web (if competition can be stylish), posted this interesting new post about the European Commission launching a new competition law quiz – see: Test your knowledge of competition policy.
This rather sleek new (EU) Commission quiz includes questions for three levels of knowledge: basic, advanced and expert (in multiple languages).
_____________________
For more information about our regulatory law services contact us: contact
For more regulatory law updates follow us on Twitter: @CanadaAttorney
The Competition Bureau announced earlier today that Alison Tait has been appointed the new Deputy Commissioner, Civil Matters Branch.
In making the announcement, the Bureau said:
“Ms. Tait has extensive experience in industrial policy, program development, and international business development, both in Canada and the United States, and is currently Director General of the Automotive and Transportation Industries Branch at Industry Canada. She has developed and implemented a number of initiatives aimed at ensuring the long-term competitiveness of the automotive sector in Canada.
She has previously served as Industry Canada’s Director responsible for Tourism, the 2010 Olympics, and Trade & Investment. Ms. Tait has also worked at the Canadian Consulate General in Boston as an Investment Counsellor, where she was responsible for attracting foreign direct investment and venture capital to Canada.”
The Competition Bureau is organized into a number of civil and criminal related “branches” consisting of: Civil Matters, Compliance and Operations, Criminal Matters, Economic Policy and Enforcement, Fair Business Practices, Legal Support, Legislative and International Affairs, Mergers and Public Affairs.
The Civil Matters Branch is responsible for administering and enforcing the civil provisions of the federal Competition Act, which include abuse of dominance (sections 78 and 79), refusal to deal (section 75), exclusive dealing / tied selling / market restriction (section 77) and price maintenance (section 76).
On March 2, 2012, a new tentative hearing date of October 17, 2012 was set in the Pro-Sys and Sun-Rype indirect purchaser price-fixing class action cases before the Supreme Court of Canada (see: Pro-Sys Consultants Ltd. (docket) and Sun-Rype Products Ltd. (docket)).
In Pro-Sys, a majority of the British Columbia Court of Appeal set aside an earlier Supreme Court of British Columbia decision granting certification and dismissed the action on the basis that the representative plaintiffs, as indirect purchasers, had no cause of action maintainable in law.
In Sun-Rype, the British Columbia Court of Appeal similarly set aside an earlier Supreme Court of British Columbia decision granting certification for indirect purchaser plaintiffs, holding that they had no cause of action and remitted the application to the trial court for consideration with respect to the direct purchaser plaintiffs.
Julius Melnitzer writing for the Financial Post reported earlier today that Mr. Justice Paul Perell of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice set hearing dates for of November 21-30 for the certification motions and application for leave to institute statutory proceedings for secondary market misrepresentation under the Ontario Securities Act in the Sino-Forest class action case.
The Globe and Mail posted a short interview with the Commissioner of Competition earlier today by Steve Ladurantaye.
Among the topics discussed by the Commissioner included misleading advertising, the perception that the Competition Bureau only pursues high profile deterrent setting cases, the Bureau’s approach to case selection and its approach to remedies.
Our friend Russell Brown at the University of Alberta has written a new book on economic loss in negligence entitled Pure Economic Loss in Canadian Negligence Law.
From LexisNexis:
“Finally, Canadian tort and contract lawyers have a new resource to consult on claims in negligence for pure economic loss. Written by law professor Russell Brown, this book comprehensively deals with this complex and often confusing area of Canadian law.
This is the first book devoted solely to examining Canadian case authorities and the unique problems that arise from them. It also introduces a new innovative macro-organizational structure for understanding pure economic loss. In doing so, the book brings new insight, explanations, and ways of looking at this complicated subject area.
The First of Its Kind
The duty of care analysis in Canadian law concerning pure economic loss has become extraordinarily complex and in some respects is not being stated or applied consistently at the Supreme Court of Canada from case to case.
Therefore, there is a real need for a book devoted solely to examining the Canadian case authorities and the unique problems that arise from them. This is that book.
A New Perspective
This book adopts a new macro-organizational structure for understanding pure economic loss: First, the subject area is divided into two parts, with each part corresponding to one of the two bases for recognizing a duty of care in negligence law. Those bases are: (1) the physical loss basis and (2) the reliance loss basis.
Second, each of the four categories of pure economic loss is assigned to one of those two parts (Relational Economic Loss and Loss of Bargain Arising from Defective Products or Building Structures fall under the physical loss basis, while Negligent Misrepresentation and Negligent Performance are consigned to the reliance loss basis).
Oxford University Press has published their March edition of the Journal of Competition Law & Economics, which includes articles on patent hold-up (Richard Epstein), buyer alliances (Ariel Ezrachi), search engine competition (Cedric Argenton) and private antitrust enforcement (Reza Rajabiun).
For more see:
We came across the following new and interesting Canadian litigation and regulatory law books, including a new defamation text and a new edition of an interesting text on law for real estate agents:
Fairness in Class Action Settlements (Carswell) – Catherine Piche
From Carswell:
“This treatise explores the legal policy and reasoning behind the mandatory judicial approval of class action settlements, the process by which it is sought and obtained, the currently relevant factors and indicia of settlement fairness which support all decisions to approve, and the roles of the principal settlement actors, particularly the settlement judge. It suggests reform recommendations applicable to these approval processes, roles of the actors and standard of settlement fairness. These recommendations are tested, for their plausibility, against empirical data obtained from the qualitative interviews of seventeen judges conducted by the author in four target jurisdictions that have similar approaches to class action settlement approvals, and where class action litigation activity is heavy: Quebec, Ontario, British Columbia, and the United States federal courts.”
For more information see:
Templates/precedents and checklists to run promotional contests in Canada
Templates/precedents and checklists to comply with Canadian anti-spam law (CASL)
