Simon's Legal Resources

(Ontario/Canada)

EVIDENCE | ADMINISTRATIVE LAW | SPPA / Fairness (Administrative)
SMALL CLAIMS / CIVIL LITIGATION / CIVIL APPEALS / JUDICIAL REVIEW / Something Big

Home / About / Democracy, Law and Duty / Testimonials / Conditions of Use

Help Isthatlegal Grow


TOPICS

(What's a Topic?)


Statutory Interpretation - Competition

. Cineplex Inc. v. Commissioner of Competition [Competition Act isn't consumer legislation]

In Cineplex Inc. v. Commissioner of Competition (Fed CA, 2026) the Federal Court of Appeal dismissed a Competition Act appeal, here brought against a Competition Tribunal finding that the appellant had "engaged in reviewable conduct by making pricing representations to the public that were false or misleading in a material respect" [CA ] - and issued a cease order, an administrative fine and costs.

Here the court notes that the Competition Act is not consumer law:
[15] It also bears noting that the Competition Act is not consumer protection legislation. While both types of statutes address false or misleading representations made to the public, they do not serve the same underlying purposes. Self-evidently, provincial consumer protection legislation is aimed at protecting the consumer. In contrast, the Competition Act is aimed at "“maintaining the proper functioning of the market in order to preserve product choice and quality”": Premier Career Management, above at para. 63. See also Tribunal reasons at para. 233.


CC0

Unless authorship is otherwise stated or obvious from the context, all
written materials in this website were created by Simon Shields, who
waives all of his copyright and related or neighboring rights to this
Isthatlegal.ca webpage. Note in particular that this waiver only applies to
Simon's material, as copyright in statutory/regulatory materials and
case extracts were never his to give away.




Last modified: 30-01-26
By: admin