Secure Energy Services Inc. - Motifs de l'ordonnance et ordonnance sur la requête de l'intimé pour refus de répondre (traduction)

Secure Energy Services Inc. - Motifs de l'ordonnance et ordonnance sur la requête de l'intimé pour refus de répondre (traduction)

The Commissioner must answer specified interrogatory questions to the best of his knowledge and belief where they seek factual recognitions relevant to the present merger (including market definition, deadweight loss, elasticity and efficiencies) but need not answer questions that impermissibly probe internal investigative conduct, request expert opinion or legal analysis; specifically, the Commissioner is ordered to answer Q156, Q332, Q334, Q355-Q358, Q359-Q361 and Q363.

Citation
2022 Comp Trib 3
Parties
Applicant: Commissaire de la concurrence; Respondent: Secure Energy Services Inc.
Court
Competition Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
15 February 2022
Procedural Posture
Mergers / Pre Trial Interrogatory/discovery Motion
Outcome
Order granted in part: Commissioner ordered to answer specified questions; other refusals upheld.
Legal Topics
Pre Trial Disclosure, Interrogatory Practice, Privilege, Relevance, Deadweight Loss, Market Definition, Efficiencies
Source Language
French
Competition Law Mergers Administrative Law Pre Trial Disclosure Interrogatory Practice Privilege Relevance Deadweight Loss +2 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 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Commissaire de la concurrence

Applicant

Secure Energy Services Inc.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Mergers / Pre Trial Interrogatory/discovery Motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Commissioner must answer contested interrogatory questions at discovery
  2. 2 Scope of disclosure obligations of the Commissioner given his investigatory role
  3. 3 Whether questions requesting investigative conduct, expert opinion or legal analysis are permissible at interrogatory

Ratio Decidendi

The Commissioner must answer specified interrogatory questions to the best of his knowledge and belief where they seek factual recognitions relevant to the present merger (including market definition, deadweight loss, elasticity and efficiencies) but need not answer questions that impermissibly probe internal investigative conduct, request expert opinion or legal analysis; specifically, the Commissioner is ordered to answer Q156, Q332, Q334, Q355-Q358, Q359-Q361 and Q363.

Court Disposition

Order granted in part: Commissioner ordered to answer specified questions; other refusals upheld.

Orders

  • The Commissioner shall answer Q156, Q332, Q334, Q355, Q356, Q357, Q358, Q359, Q360, Q361 and Q363 to the best of his knowledge and belief.
  • No order requiring the Commissioner to answer questions that seek internal investigative conduct, legal analysis or expert opinion or otherwise clearly inappropriate questions.