Canada Pipe - Reasons and Order respecting certain provisions of the Competition Tribunal rules

Canada Pipe - Reasons and Order respecting certain provisions of the Competition Tribunal rules

The Tribunal held that the Proctor affidavit is struck for being argumentative and unnecessary; the Rowley affidavit is admissible in part. The amended Rules (focusing disclosure on records Commissioner intends to rely on) are not, on their face, incompatible with the Bill of Rights right to a fair hearing, but the Commissioner breached Rule 4.1 by claiming public interest privilege over documents listed in his disclosure statement and by providing amalgamated will-say statements. The Commissioner must furnish a fresh disclosure statement within 14 days listing all records he intends to rely upon and permit inspection and copying; provide a separate will-say statement for each non-expert...

Citation
2003 Comp Trib 15
Parties
Applicant (respondent on the Motion): Commissioner of Competition; Respondent (applicant on the Motion): Canada Pipe Company Ltd.
Court
Competition Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
8 August 2003
Procedural Posture
Abuse of Dominant Position; Exclusive Dealing; Market Restriction; Tied Selling / Pre Hearing Motions (bill of Rights and Disclosure Motions)
Outcome
Partially granted in favour of Canada Pipe on disclosure and affidavit issues; otherwise motions dismissed
Legal Topics
Competition Tribunal Rules, Disclosure Obligations, Public Interest Privilege, Section 11 Orders (ex Parte Examinations), Procedural Fairness, Canadian Bill of Rights S.2(e)
Source Language
English
Competition Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Evidence Law Civil Procedure Competition Tribunal Rules Disclosure Obligations Public Interest Privilege +3 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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Commissioner of Competition

Applicant (respondent on the Motion)

Canada Pipe Company Ltd.

Respondent (applicant on the Motion)

Procedural Posture

Abuse of Dominant Position; Exclusive Dealing; Market Restriction; Tied Selling / Pre Hearing Motions (bill of Rights and Disclosure Motions)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether affidavits (Proctor and Rowley) should be struck
  2. 2 Applicability of Canadian Bill of Rights para 2(e) to Tribunal proceedings
  3. 3 Content of the duty of fairness

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal held that the Proctor affidavit is struck for being argumentative and unnecessary; the Rowley affidavit is admissible in part. The amended Rules (focusing disclosure on records Commissioner intends to rely on) are not, on their face, incompatible with the Bill of Rights right to a fair hearing, but the Commissioner breached Rule 4.1 by claiming public interest privilege over documents listed in his disclosure statement and by providing amalgamated will-say statements. The Commissioner must furnish a fresh disclosure statement within 14 days listing all records he intends to rely upon and permit inspection and copying; provide a separate will-say statement for each non-expert...

Court Disposition

Partially granted in favour of Canada Pipe on disclosure and affidavit issues; otherwise motions dismissed

Orders

  • Affidavit of Mr. James M. Proctor II struck from the record
  • Rowley affidavit retained in evidence