Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 20 OCTOBER 2011

The Death Of Indirect Purchaser Claims In Canada?

The jurisprudence regarding competition class actions was somewhat unsettled in Canada until the British Columbia Court of Appeal released two concurrent judgments, "Pro-Sys Consultants Ltd. v. Microsoft Corp." (Microsoft) and "Sun-Rype Products Ltd. v. Archer Daniels Midland Co." (Sun-Rype) which found that indirect purchasers of allegedly price-fixed products "have no cause of action recognized in law."

CanadaAntitrust/Competition Law

The jurisprudence regarding competition class actions was somewhat unsettled in Canada until the British Columbia Court of Appeal released two concurrent judgments, Pro-Sys Consultants Ltd. v. Microsoft Corp. (Microsoft) and Sun-Rype Products Ltd. v. Archer Daniels Midland Co. (Sun-Rype) which found that indirect purchasers of allegedly price-fixed products "have no cause of action recognized in law." This finding seems to depart from the trend of previous decisions which signalled greater opportunities for plaintiffs to achieve certification. Now many believe that the stage is set for the Supreme Court of Canada to clarify the scope of private antitrust enforcement in Canada.

Prior Jurisprudence

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from