Publication
Global rules on foreign direct investment (FDI)
Cross-border acquisitions and investments increasingly trigger foreign direct investment (FDI) screening requirements.
Canada | Publication | September 2, 2022
On August 17, the Federal Court of Appeal upheld a decision to strike a proposed class action alleging a conspiracy amongst the major North American hockey leagues to limit the professional opportunities of Canadian hockey players.
The decision confirms that section 45 of the Competition Act (the Act) does not apply to “buy-side” conspiracies between competitors for the purchase or acquisition of a product or service (subject to an important caveat in the employment law context discussed below). The case also marks the first time a court has substantively considered the scope of the lesser-known professional sports conspiracy provisions of the Competition Act.
From a procedural perspective the decision also provides guidance on motions to strike as an important tool for weeding out unmeritorious class action claims at an early stage in the proceedings.
Mohr v National Hockey League et al involved a proposed class action against all major North American Hockey leagues, including the NHL, AHL, ECHL, CHL, and Hockey Canada.
The plaintiff, a former CHL hockey player, alleged that the defendant hockey leagues and Hockey Canada conspired to limit Canadian major junior hockey players’ opportunities to negotiate and play in the professional league of their choice, contrary to the criminal provisions of section 48 of the Act prohibiting conspiracies relating to professional sport.
The CHL, its member leagues, and Hockey Canada, sought to strike the proceedings on two principal grounds:
At first instance, Chief Justice Crampton of the Federal Court agreed with both of these arguments and struck the plaintiff’s claim in its entirety without leave to amend.
The plaintiff appealed the Federal Court of Appeal decision. In a unanimous judgment, the court dismissed the plaintiff’s appeal and confirmed that motions to strike are an important judicial screening tool in the context of class actions.
While the Federal Court of Appeal disagreed with certain aspects of the lower court’s decision, they agreed on the two critical points above: (i) section 48 was inapplicable, because that provision applies only to certain agreements within a given sports league, whereas the plaintiff was alleging a inter-league conspiracy involving different leagues and Hockey Canada and (ii) section 45 was also inapplicable, as it did not apply to the alleged “sell-side” agreement. Having reached these conclusions, the Federal Court of Appeal held that the claim had no reasonable chance of success and was properly struck.
This decision confirms that section 45(1) of the Act does not apply to agreements between buyers for the purchase or acquisition of a product or service. Buy-side agreements will (subject to the caveat below) be reviewed under the civil provisions of the Act.
The important caveat to this statement is that, in June 2022, the Act was amended to include a new provision that expressly criminalizes “wage-fixing” and “no-poach” agreements between employers. These provisions come into force on June 23, 2023, and will prohibit agreements between non-affiliated employers to “fix, maintain, decrease or control salaries, wages or terms and conditions of employment” and “to not solicit or hire each other’s employees.” Once in force, the new offence will bring Canadian law more in line with other jurisdictions, including the US, where these types of employer agreements are already criminalized. The new provisions apply only to certain agreements between non-affiliated employers. Where there is no employer-employee relationship (as is the case for major junior hockey players), the civil provisions of the Act would apply.
This decision also confirms the strategic importance of bringing dispositive motions, such as motions to strike, early on in the class proceedings. In this case, the defendants acted quickly and advised the court of their intention to bring the motion at the first opportunity. As a result, the Federal Court was persuaded that the motion should be heard prior to certification, resulting in significant cost and time savings for the parties.
Norton Rose Fulbright Canada successfully represented the CHL and its member leagues, the WHL, OHL and QMJHL on the motion to strike and before the Federal Court of Appeal.
Publication
Cross-border acquisitions and investments increasingly trigger foreign direct investment (FDI) screening requirements.
Publication
On February 2, 2024, the Belgian Presidency of the Council of the European Union confirmed that the Committee of Permanent Representatives had signed the Artificial Intelligence (AI) Regulation, referred to as the AI Act. Approval by the EU Parliament followed on 13 March 2024, and the AI Act is likely to appear in the EU’s Official Journal around May 2024. The AI Act aims to establish a stringent legal framework governing the development, marketing, and utilisation of artificial intelligence within the region, thereby marking a significant advancement in the regulation of this burgeoning domain.
Publication
The private credit market and direct lending have grown and diversified immensely in the past decade, offering alternative sources and terms of debt compared to those historically provided by the syndicated leveraged loan and public issuance markets. Consequently, they are fast becoming pivotal components in the capital ecosystem, so much so that the Bank of England consider that the private credit market is currently responsible for approximately $1.8 trillion of debt issuance, which is four times its size in 2015. This growth has been particularly pronounced in Europe and the US but there has also been significant activity in Asia.
Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest legal news, information and events . . .
© Norton Rose Fulbright LLP 2023