2 results
Canada
-
- By Mark Opashinov, McMillan LLP, Toronto, Canada
- General editor Maher M. Dabbah, Queen Mary University of London, Paul Lasok QC
-
- Book:
- Merger Control Worldwide
- Published online:
- 05 November 2014
- Print publication:
- 31 May 2012, pp 243-283
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Relevant legislation and statutory standards
Canadian merger law in its modern form began with the 1986 amendments to the Competition Act. After many years of attempted reform of the Combines Investigation Act, which had its origins in the nineteenth century and a criminal approach to the regulation of mergers, the 1986 amendments created a civil ‘reviewable practices’ regime that recognised the generally economically beneficial effect of mergers and created a framework for review that was based in contemporary economic thinking about mergers and their effects on markets.
Structure and content of the Competition Act
The Act is the primary law governing competition in Canada. Providing a single regime for the review and control of mergers, the Act is complemented by the Notifiable Transaction Regulations promulgated pursuant to the Act and by the Competition Tribunal Act. The Act is divided into 11 parts, the two of most relevance to merger review being Part VIII (‘Matters Reviewable by the Tribunal’) and Part IX (‘Notifiable Transactions’).
7 - Canada
-
- By Mark Opashinov, McMillan Binch Mendelsohn LLP, Toronto, Canada
- General editor Maher M. Dabbah, Queen Mary University of London, K. P. E. Lasok QC
-
- Book:
- Merger Control Worldwide
- Published online:
- 30 July 2009
- Print publication:
- 29 May 2008, pp 30-31
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
There have been two developments of particular note in Canadian merger jurisprudence and practice. The first relates to the Competition Tribunal's understanding of the Commissioner's statutory burden when seeking an interim injunction to prevent a proposed transaction from being consummated to afford the Commissioner more time to complete her review. The second concerns the Commissioner's recently issued position on proposed remedies for problematic mergers.
Scope of interim injunctions to prevent consummation of proposed transactions
If the Commissioner has not brought an application for a Section 92 order seeking to enjoin the consummation of a proposed transaction but is concerned that the parties may, after the expiry of the applicable waiting period, take steps to consummate their transaction, Section 100 allows the Commissioner to apply for an interim order. If granted, the Tribunal can issue an order “forbidding any person named in the application from doing any act or thing that it appears to the Tribunal may constitute or be directed toward the completion or implementation of a proposed merger” for up to 10 days on an ex parte basis or up to 30 days on notice to the parties (extendable for up to 60 days on subsequent application), provided the following are satisfied:
the Commissioner certifies that a Section 10(1)(b) inquiry into the proposed transaction is being carried out under the Act and that, in the Commissioner's opinion, more time is required to complete the inquiry; and
the Tribunal finds that, in the absence of the interim order, its ability to remedy any anti-competitive harm caused by the merger would be substantially impaired.