Court Drops Misleading Advertising Case Against Rogers

Rogers' advertising claims that customers of its Chatr brand experienced fewer dropped calls than customers of new entrants, including Wind Mobile and Public Mobile, were not false or misleading, the Ontario Superior Court held today in dismissing an application by the Commissioner of Competition.

Other highlights of the decision include:

• While drive testing is capable of adequately and properly testing the fewer dropped calls claim, Rogers did not perform drive tests in some cities before making the dropped calls claim, and thus failed to perform adequate and proper tests.
• The court applied the "credulous and technically inexperienced consumer" standard. This standard was derived from the decision of the Supreme Court in Richard v Time Inc.