Air Canada / CanJet - Reasons for an Order dated Friday, November 24, 2000

Air Canada / CanJet - Reasons for an Order dated Friday, November 24, 2000

The Tribunal confirmed the Commissioner’s temporary order as varied (deleted the phrase 'any similar fares') and extended it to December 31, 2000 because, while the Tribunal was not satisfied the specific harms alleged existed at the date the Original Order was made, it was satisfied the harm described in s.104.1(1)(b)(ii) was likely to exist at the hearing; the Commissioner had commenced an inquiry and his opinion that Air Canada’s conduct 'could' constitute an anti‑competitive act was reasonably open to him; 'likely' means probable; the open‑ended phrase 'any similar fares' was too vague and unenforceable and therefore struck.

Citation
2000 Comp Trib 26
Parties
Applicant: Air Canada; Respondent: The Commissioner of Competition; Affected Party: I.M.P. Group Limited (CanJet Airlines)
Court
Competition Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
7 December 2000
Procedural Posture
Rescission or Variation of Order / Application Under S.104.1(7) Hearing
Outcome
Temporary order confirmed as varied and extended to December 31, 2000; phrase 'any similar fares' deleted; CanJet added as a party.
Legal Topics
Temporary Orders, Predatory Pricing, Abuse of Dominance, Avoidable Costs, Tribunal Jurisdiction
Source Language
English
Competition Law Administrative Law Transportation / Aviation Regulation Temporary Orders Predatory Pricing Abuse of Dominance Avoidable Costs Tribunal Jurisdiction

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Air Canada

Applicant

The Commissioner of Competition

Respondent

I.M.P. Group Limited (CanJet Airlines)

Affected Party

Procedural Posture

Rescission or Variation of Order / Application Under S.104.1(7) Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Scope of Tribunal review of s.104.1 orders
  2. 2 Meaning of 'likely' in s.104.1
  3. 3 Whether Commissioner could form opinion re: avoidable costs

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal confirmed the Commissioner’s temporary order as varied (deleted the phrase 'any similar fares') and extended it to December 31, 2000 because, while the Tribunal was not satisfied the specific harms alleged existed at the date the Original Order was made, it was satisfied the harm described in s.104.1(1)(b)(ii) was likely to exist at the hearing; the Commissioner had commenced an inquiry and his opinion that Air Canada’s conduct 'could' constitute an anti‑competitive act was reasonably open to him; 'likely' means probable; the open‑ended phrase 'any similar fares' was too vague and unenforceable and therefore struck.

Court Disposition

Temporary order confirmed as varied and extended to December 31, 2000; phrase 'any similar fares' deleted; CanJet added as a party.

Orders

  • The Commissioner’s order of October 12, 2000, as extended on October 31, 2000, is varied to delete the reference to 'any similar fares' and is otherwise confirmed until midnight Eastern Standard Time on December 31, 2000.
  • I.M.P. Group Limited (CanJet Airlines) is added as a party.