Julie Rosenthal quoted in "Vancouver airport decision clarifies law on evidence and costs, lawyers say", PaRR
|Area||Competition, Antitrust and Foreign Investment|
Excerpts from "Vancouver airport decision clarifies law on evidence and costs, lawyers say", Mark Coakley, PaRR:
During the tribunal hearing, the CCB had argued for a "more relaxed approach to the evidentiary rules," said Julie Rosenthal, a competition lawyer at Goodmans who successfully represented the Vancouver Airport Authority.
The CCT decision also provided some clarity on the issue of costs, Rosenthal said.
The losing party in contested cases usually pays some of the legal expenses of the winning party, Rosenthal said. The CCB argued that, despite the dismissal of its application, it should not have to pay costs because there was a "broad public interest in bringing the case because the case would clarify the scope of section 79" of the Competition Act. The CCT disagreed, ordering the CCB to pay the Vancouver Airport Authority USD 70,000 for legal costs and USD 1.25m for disbursements.
This "represents a bit of a stepping back" from the CCT's decision in The Commissioner of Competition v. Visa Canada Corporation and MasterCard International Incorporated, Rosenthal said. In that 2013 decision, the CCT noted the public interest served by the CCB's unsuccessful application and did not award costs.
In Vancouver Airport Authority, Rosenthal explained, the CCT is clarifying that parties should not read the language in Visa Canada "overly broadly." There is no consistent public interest exemption to the ordinary rule that costs follow the event, she noted.
Click here to read the full article.