Archive for the 'Competition Bureau' Category
March 22, 2013
Earlier today, the Competition Bureau announced that three individuals have been found guilty for their roles in the ongoing Quebec gas price-fixing case (see: Quebec Gas Price-fixers Found Guilty).
March 21, 2013
In a somewhat unusual but interesting case released yesterday, a U.S. appeals court in Louisiana upheld the ability of Benedictine monks to sell caskets in competition with and more cheaply than state funeral homes (for a copy of the decision see: here).
March 20, 2013
The International Antitrust Law Committee of the American Bar Association has published a new chapter rounding up key antitrust developments in 14 countries in 2012, including Canada, as well as Brazil, Mexico, the United States, Australia, China and India. Canadian developments discussed include mergers (including the Bureau’s revised Merger Process Guidelines and the TMX/Maple merger), abuse of dominance (including the Bureau’s updated Abuse of Dominance Guidelines and TREB real estate board case), cartels (including the first conviction under Canada’s amended cartel rules) and price maintenance (the Visa/MasterCard price maintenance case).
For a copy of the ABA’s chapter see: here.
March 20, 2013
Grant Thornton has published a new white paper on construction fraud in Canada entitled: Construction Fraud in Canada: Understand It, Prevent It, Detect It.
March 19, 2013
Competition/antitrust enforcement agencies in both the U.S. and Canada have been increasing their focus on new media advertising/marketing practices, notably in the mobile space.
In Canada, recent cases and initiatives include the ongoing challenge by the Competition Bureau of Bell/Rogers/Telus for allegedly misleading premium text claims, statements by the Interim Commissioner of Competition that one of the Bureau’s advocacy priorities includes the digital economy and Federal Government and regulatory (CRTC) initiatives to spur increased wireless competition.
In the midst of these Canadian developments, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission has as well recently been increasing its focus on the digital economy, which has updated “Dot Com Disclosures” and a new video several days ago with advertising and privacy law tips for mobile app developers (see: FTC Staff Revises Online Advertising Disclosure Guidelines and FTC Announces Video With Tips for Mobile App Developers).
In Canada, the equivalent to the FTC’s new Dot Com Disclosures are the Competition Bureau’s Internet Advertising Guidelines (Application of the Competition Act to Representations on the Internet), which was last updated back in 2009 (though has not been substantially updated in some years).
The FTC’s new guidance for mobile and other online advertisers, which updates its Dot Com Disclosures released back in 2000, not only explains how advertisers can make sure their products and services are described truthfully online, but more specifically takes smart phone and social media marketing into account.
The FTC’s new .com Disclosures: How to Make Effective Disclosures in Digital Advertising provides a number of best practices for disclosures in mobile ads and highlights the need for advertisers to make those disclosures clear and conspicuous.
Some of the FTC’s tips, many (if not most) of which are also applicable in Canada, include:
Place disclosures [i.e., disclaimers as we call them in Canada] close to claims they qualify in an online ad: Consumers using devices with small screens may miss disclosure hyperlinks that are separated from a claim by text or graphics, so advertisers should be sure to place the link near the relevant information. This is good advice for conventional advertising, and particularly important guidance for advertising using new media (including for Canadian advertisers/marketers).
March 18, 2013
Readers of this blog will know that I often write about bid-rigging (see for example: here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here). Frequently I write about a recent case, investigation, newly announced guilty plea, key types of bid-rigging and penalties and convictions (e.g., the elimination of conditional sentencing for bid-rigging).
March 16, 2013
In a very interesting case reported by the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg and others, a U.S. District Court late last week ordered Chinese vitamin C manufacturers (including Hebei Welcome Pharmaceutical Co. and North China Pharmaceutical Group Corp.) to pay more than $162 million, after a New York jury found the companies liable in this civil price-fixing case. Other companies, including China Pharmaceutical Group Ltd., reached settlements before trial.
March 15, 2013
In February, GCR published a new edition of The Asia-Pacific Antitrust Review (2013), which includes: Australia (Cartels, mergers and telecom), Canada (mergers and the Investment Canada Act), China, India (overview and mergers), Japan (cartels and mergers) and Malaysia (which recently introduced competition law).
Overview:
“Global Competition Review is delighted to publish the ninth annual edition of The Asia-Pacific Antitrust Review, one of a series of special reports that deliver specialist intelligence and research designed to help subscribers successfully navigate the world’s increasingly complex competition regimes. Read in conjunction with The European Antitrust Review and The Antitrust Review of the Americas, it gives general counsel, government agencies and private practice lawyers unparalleled annual insights into the development of the world’s competition regimes.”
For more information see: The Asia-Pacific Antitrust Review 2013.
Templates/precedents and checklists to run promotional contests in Canada
Templates/precedents and checklists to comply with Canadian anti-spam law (CASL)
