8X Labs v Vistar Media - Order and Reasons (Motion under Rule 119)

8X Labs v Vistar Media - Order and Reasons (Motion under Rule 119)

The Tribunal granted leave because the draft Mitchell and Fraser affidavits are sufficiently tailored and discrete, directly responsive to factual allegations in the Dionne affidavit, relate to elements of sections 75, 76, 77 and 79 of the Competition Act, contain evidence not previously in the record, and any overlapping exhibits are permissible for readability; credibility and substantiation issues are to be addressed by oath and on the merits.

Citation
2026 Comp Trib 8
Parties
Applicant: 8X Labs Inc.; Respondent: Vistar Media Inc.
Court
Competition Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
24 February 2026
Procedural Posture
Leave to Make Application Under Section 103.1 of the Competition Act / Motion for Leave to Adduce Responding Evidence Under Rule 119(3) of the Competition Tribunal Rules
Outcome
Motion granted: respondent granted leave to file executed versions of the draft Mitchell and Fraser affidavits; costs reserved to disposition of the section 103.1 leave application.
Legal Topics
Leave to Commence Application, Responding Affidavit Evidence, Rule 119(3), Tied Selling, Refusal to Deal, Digital Out of Home Advertising
Source Language
English
Competition Law Administrative Law Antitrust Procedure Leave to Commence Application Responding Affidavit Evidence Rule 119(3) Tied Selling Refusal to Deal +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

8X Labs Inc.

Applicant

Vistar Media Inc.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Make Application Under Section 103.1 of the Competition Act / Motion for Leave to Adduce Responding Evidence Under Rule 119(3) of the Competition Tribunal Rules

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether respondent should be granted leave under Rule 119(3) to file responding affidavits
  2. 2 Whether the proposed affidavits are narrowly tailored to discrete factual issues and not wide-ranging merits evidence
  3. 3 Whether the proposed affidavits present new credible evidence and are responsive to the applicant's affidavit

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal granted leave because the draft Mitchell and Fraser affidavits are sufficiently tailored and discrete, directly responsive to factual allegations in the Dionne affidavit, relate to elements of sections 75, 76, 77 and 79 of the Competition Act, contain evidence not previously in the record, and any overlapping exhibits are permissible for readability; credibility and substantiation issues are to be addressed by oath and on the merits.

Court Disposition

Motion granted: respondent granted leave to file executed versions of the draft Mitchell and Fraser affidavits; costs reserved to disposition of the section 103.1 leave application.

Orders

  • Respondent granted leave to adduce responding evidence under Rule 119 by filing executed versions of the draft Mitchell Affidavit and the draft Fraser Affidavit.
  • Costs of the motion reserved to the disposition of the application for leave under section 103.1.