Rogers Cablesystems Limited v. Look Communications Inc., et al.

Rogers Cablesystems Limited v. Look Communications Inc., et al.

The trial judge correctly held that the landlord lawfully exercised its contractual right to terminate Rogers’ privilege to supply cable services to the buildings and tenants; a lawful contractual termination cannot found a tort claim for intentional interference, so there was no need to decide the broader tort or regulatory breach issues and the appellate court dismissed the appeal.

Citation
C32527
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: Rogers Cablesystems Limited; Respondent/defendant: Look Communications Inc.; Respondent/defendant: Look T.V. Ontario Inc.; Respondent/defendant (landlord): 690981 Ontario Limited; Respondent/defendant (landlord): Creccal Investments Limited; Intervenor/third Party: Jerry Lapchuk; Intervenor/third Party: Alf N. Pepe; Intervenor/third Party: Juanita Peralta; Intervenor/third Party: Daniela Michalska; Intervenor/third Party: Bertha Turgeon; Intervenor/third Party: Joan Dart
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 February 2000
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal to Court of Appeal From Trial Judgment of Nordheimer J. Dated July 5, 1999; Issue Trial Directed on Termination and Interference Questions
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Intentional Interference With Economic Relations, Termination of Contractual Rights, Undue Preference Under Broadcasting Distribution Regulations S.9, Exclusive Dealing
Source Language
English
Torts Contract Broadcasting Regulation Intentional Interference With Economic Relations Termination of Contractual Rights Undue Preference Under Broadcasting Distribution Regulations S.9 Exclusive Dealing

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rogers Cablesystems Limited

Appellant/plaintiff

Look Communications Inc.

Respondent/defendant

Look T.V. Ontario Inc.

Respondent/defendant

690981 Ontario Limited

Respondent/defendant (landlord)

Creccal Investments Limited

Respondent/defendant (landlord)

Jerry Lapchuk

Intervenor/third Party

Alf N. Pepe

Intervenor/third Party

Juanita Peralta

Intervenor/third Party

Daniela Michalska

Intervenor/third Party

Bertha Turgeon

Intervenor/third Party

Joan Dart

Intervenor/third Party

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal to Court of Appeal From Trial Judgment of Nordheimer J. Dated July 5, 1999; Issue Trial Directed on Termination and Interference Questions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether landlord could terminate Rogers’ contractual right to supply cable services to buildings and tenants
  2. 2 Whether termination amounted to unlawful/intentional interference with Rogers’ economic relations
  3. 3 Whether Look breached s.9 of the Broadcasting Distribution Regulations by giving an undue preference

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge correctly held that the landlord lawfully exercised its contractual right to terminate Rogers’ privilege to supply cable services to the buildings and tenants; a lawful contractual termination cannot found a tort claim for intentional interference, so there was no need to decide the broader tort or regulatory breach issues and the appellate court dismissed the appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Defendants 690981 Ontario Limited and Creccal Investments Limited can terminate the right of Rogers Cablesystems Limited to supply television services to the Buildings and the tenants therein, and have not wrongfully interfered with the economic interests of Rogers Cablesystems Limited.
  • Appeal dismissed with costs