Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In 1985, the conservative government of Brian Mulroney replaced the Combines Investigation Act, 1923, with the Competition Act, which came into effect on June 19, 1986. [1] [7] [2] The provisions in this Act regarding civil mergers, which deal with both horizontal and vertical mergers, replaced the ineffectual Criminal Code provisions under which only a handful of cases were brought between ...
In 1986, the Government of Canada enacted major reforms of Canada's competition law by introducing simultaneously the Competition Tribunal Act [7] and the Competition Act, [8] the latter of which would replace the Combines Investigation Act. [5] [6] The Competition Act dissolved the Restrictive Trade Practices Commission and created the ...
The Competition Bureau investigated the purchase as a violation of the Competition Act. The Competition Tribunal held that Southam violated section 92 of the Competition Act and ordered the company to sell off one of the papers. The Tribunal found that the newspapers were not in the same market with regards to print advertising markets. There ...
In addition to its main operations, the Competition Bureau also jointly manages the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre (CAFC), in partnership with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and the Ontario Provincial Police. [5] Under the Competition Act, the Competition Bureau can also challenge civil and merger matters before the Competition Tribunal.
the Combines Investigation Act, either in whole or in part, was intra vires Parliament under s. 91(2) of the Constitution Act, 1867, and; s. 31.1 of the Act [5] (which created a civil cause of action) was integrated with the Act in such a way that it too was intra vires under s. 91(2)
Get AOL Mail for FREE! Manage your email like never before with travel, photo & document views. Personalize your inbox with themes & tabs. You've Got Mail!
The Business Council of Canada President and CEO, Goldy Hyder, said officials had promised that any changes to the Competition Act would be done only after comprehensive consultations with all impacted stakeholders, but the amendments "came as an ambush" without adequate consultation or parliamentary debate. [4]
Critics of the Ontario Court of Appeal's interpretation of the Act in Molson argue that giving priority to registration strays from a fundamental precept of trade-mark law that owners' rights derive from use, not registration. [22] However, even under the Act it is not correct to say that registration makes a person the owner of a trademark ...