Parrish & Heimbecker, Limited - Order regarding the Commissioner's request for an expedited proceeding process

Parrish & Heimbecker, Limited - Order regarding the Commissioner's request for an expedited proceeding process

The Tribunal refused to impose the expedited proceeding process because the Commissioner failed to satisfy the burden of showing the expedited process was reasonable and advisable in light of disputed factual and legal complexity, contested allegations of imminent harm, and procedural fairness concerns; the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2020 Comp Trib 1
Parties
Applicant: The Commissioner of Competition; Respondent: Parrish & Heimbecker, Limited
Court
Competition Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
13 January 2020
Procedural Posture
Mergers (s. 92 Competition Act) / Case Management Conference; Order Refusing Expedited Process
Outcome
Commissioner’s request for an expedited proceeding process refused; matter to proceed on regular timetable with hearing in October/November 2020
Legal Topics
Expedited Proceeding Process, Section 92, Interim Relief (s.104), Timetable and Scheduling, Procedural Fairness, Divestiture Remedy
Source Language
english
Competition Law Merger Review Administrative Law Expedited Proceeding Process Section 92 Interim Relief (s.104) Timetable and Scheduling Procedural Fairness +1 more

Source-derived case record

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

The Commissioner of Competition

Applicant

Parrish & Heimbecker, Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Mergers (s. 92 Competition Act) / Case Management Conference; Order Refusing Expedited Process

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal should impose an expedited proceeding process over the objection of the respondent
  2. 2 Whether the Commissioner has discharged the burden to show the expedited process is reasonable and advisable in light of fairness and circumstances
  3. 3 Whether alleged imminent harm to farmers justifies expedited treatment or interim relief under s.104

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal refused to impose the expedited proceeding process because the Commissioner failed to satisfy the burden of showing the expedited process was reasonable and advisable in light of disputed factual and legal complexity, contested allegations of imminent harm, and procedural fairness concerns; the alternative regular timetable proposed by P&H allowing a hearing in October/November 2020 was not shown to be unreasonable and complied with the Tribunal's directions.

Court Disposition

Commissioner’s request for an expedited proceeding process refused; matter to proceed on regular timetable with hearing in October/November 2020

Orders

  • The Commissioner’s request for an Expedited Process is refused.
  • Parties shall file proposed timetable(s) on consent or separately by February 17, 2020, providing that the hearing will take place in October/November 2020 and contacting the Registry to confirm availability.