Archive for the 'News' Category
Earlier today, the Wall Street Journal and others reported that the Quebec Securities Commission said that it intends to approve the proposed acquisition of the TMX by the Maple Group (see: Quebec Regulator Gives Nod to Maple/TMX Deal).
The Competition Bureau, however, was reported by the Montreal Gazette and others today to have repeated its concerns about the proposed transaction:
“A spokeswoman for the federal antitrust watchdog said there were no new developments to report regarding its continuing review of the proposed deal.
‘As we said in November, while it is accurate to say the commissioner’s views may be affected by further factual information and developments, a significant and material change to the competitive consequences to the proposed transaction would be required to sufficiently address the commissioner’s serious concerns communicated to the parties in November,’ spokesperson Alexa Keating said.”
The Victoria Real Estate Board will be holding a competition law course for its members – “Competition Law and REALTORS®: What You Say and Do Matters” – on Monday March 19th.
About this course:
“Competition Law and REALTORS®: What You Say and Do Matters was designed by ACRE with the assistance of CREA to help Canadian REALTORS® understand and comply with Canadian competition law. While Canadian competition law applies to all real estate professionals, this course was designed specifically for REALTORS®. This course provides an overview in plain language of Canadian competition law and practical compliance guidelines to assist REALTORS® in complying with Canadian competition law and a number of illustrative case studies. This national competition law course is available to members of Canadian real estate boards and associations.”
This course will be instructed by Steve Szentesi.
On increasing speculation about potential bidders for Viterra, the company issued a short press release earlier today. In its release, Viterra said:
“Viterra Inc. … at the request of Market Surveillance on behalf of the Toronto Stock Exchange, acknowledges that, in response to expressions of interest from third parties to acquire the Company, a process has been established by the Board of Directors of Viterra, which includes confidentiality agreements being entered into and the provision of due diligence.
Viterra is aware of press reports speculating about, among other things, the process, parties involved and third parties expressions of interest of at least Cdn$16 per Viterra common share. Viterra cautions investors not to rely on these press reports as there can be no assurance that a transaction will occur and that if one does occur, there can be no assurance at what price it will be completed.
Viterra has engaged financial and legal advisors to provide support with this process.
A further announcement will be made if appropriate.”
Given the recent high-profile contest case decided by the Supreme Court of Canada late last month (see: Supreme Court Awards Compensatory and Punitive Damages in Misleading Contest Case), this short note posted by Consumer Protection BC earlier today on sweepstakes scams caught my eye: Seniors Continue to be Victims of a Classic Scam.
Consumer Protection BC discusses, among other things, enforcement efforts in a recent BC deceptive sweepstakes case and tips to avoid becoming a victim of fraud.
Some of the suggestions made by Consumer Protection BC include not paying for prizes upfront, being suspicious of free gifts, not sending contest organizers personal information, shredding personal information before disposing and explaining scams to vulnerable family members.
Given the recent announcements that the LIBOR price-fixing investigation had expanded to Canada (see: Cartel Update: Competition Bureau Investigates Alleged Interbank Lending Rate Coordination), I thought that I would post some information about this rather interesting recent paper by Rosa M. Abrantes-Metz and Albert D. Metz discussing the use of screens in distinguishing explicit from tacit collusion in price-fixing cases. (“Screens” are statistical tests designed to identify whether collusion or manipulation exists in a market and which companies/individuals may be involved.)
This paper has been published by our friends at Competition Policy International (CPI) in their March edition of CPI Antitrust Chronicle (see: Competition Policy International).
The International Antitrust Law Committee of the ABA has published their March 2012 “Hot Topics” Newsletter entitled “Updates to the Canadian Merger Review Process” (see: Updates to the Canadian Merger Review Process).
Abstract:
“On January 11, 2012, the Canadian Competition Bureau published a revision of its Merger Review Process Guidelines. The revised Guidelines set out the Bureau’s approach to the merger review process under the Competition Act, which was most recently articulated in 2009 following the significant changes to the merger notification provisions which conform more closely to the ‘second request’ system employed in the United States.
The revised Guidelines represent refinements rather than wholesale changes to the process articulated in 2009, and are principally concerned with the procedures to be followed when responding to a Supplementary Information Request (‘SIR’)”
Byron Holland, CEO and President of Canada’s Internet domain name regulator the Canadian Internet Registration Authority (CIRA), has written an interesting short note on domain name seizures and the importance of domains to the global economy (see: Domain name seizures and .CA).
Topics he chats about include the recent seizure by U.S. authorities of the Canadian online gaming site bodog.com, which garnered rather a lot of media attention recently, jurisdictional issues connected to the registration of domain names and the importance of the Internet to the global economy:
“If you register a domain name with an extension that is managed in another country, it is likely subject to the laws of that country – full stop. If a website is found to be in violation of American law, and the domain for that site is an extension managed by a U.S. entity, the U.S. government may seize it.
If you keep your business in another country (in the case of Canada, register a .CA with a Canadian Registrar and use a Canadian web host), foreign governments can’t unilaterally seize it. CIRA has never been asked by a foreign government to shut down or seize a domain name.
Bloomberg, the Wall Street Journal, the Globe and Mail and others are reporting that Glencore International Plc has made a £3.5 billion ($5.5 billion) bid for Viterra Inc., Canada’s largest grain handler (see e.g.: Glencore in $5.49 Billion Bid for Viterra Telegraph Says).
In reporting this story, Bloomberg said:
“Buying Viterra would give Glencore the largest share of the Canadian grain-handling market just as the Canadian Wheat Board’s monopoly over wheat and barley grown in the west of the country comes to an end. Viterra’s share of Canadian grain- handling may rise to almost 50 percent in the next few years from 45 percent, its Chief Executive Officer Mayo Schmidt said in an interview on March 8.
Viterra said in January it expects to increase grain volumes and earnings after the board’s control of supplies ends. The Canadian government passed a law in December that will end the monopoly and give farmers the choice to sell to other buyers as of Aug. 1.
A deal with Glencore might also help the company’s agricultural business to return to profit after a “difficult year” said Fairfax’s Meyer. Moving into storage of wheat and other logistics beyond just trading grains would likely help boost their margins, he said.
Glencore said Feb. 7 that 2011 adjusted earnings before interest and tax from its agricultural trading unit swung to an $8 million loss from a $659 million profit a year earlier after experiencing an ‘unprecedented cotton market.’”
For more media reports see: WSJ – Glencore, Cargill Looking at Viterra, The Australian – Cargill joins Glencore in circling Viterra, sale process expected, Globe and Mail – Glencore reportedly Viterra suitor