Competition Tribunal IN THE MATTER OF an application by the Director of Investigation and Research under sections 79 and 105 of the Competition Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-34;
AND IN THE MATTER OF certain practices of the publishers of Yellow Pages telephone directories in Canada;
AND IN THE MATTER OF a Consent Order granted by the Competition Tribunal and dated November 18, 1994;
AND IN THE MATTER OF an application by TELUS Advertising Services Inc. and TELUS Advertising Services (Edmonton) Inc. under section 105 and paragraph 106(b) of the Competition Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-34 to vary the Consent Order granted by the Competition Tribunal and dated November 18, 1994.
B E T W E E N: TELUS Advertising Services Inc. TELUS Advertising Services (Edmonton) Inc.
Applicants - and - The Director of Investigation and Research Anglo Canadian Telephone Company DirectWest Publishers Ltd. The Manitoba Telephone System MT & T Holdings Incorporated Tele-Direct (Publications) Inc. Tele-Direct (Services) Inc.
Respondents
ORDER VARYING CONSENT ORDER DATED NOVEMBER 18, 1994
Tribunal de la Concurrence CT - 1994 / 002 – Doc # 48a
Decided on the basis of the written record. Members: Rothstein J. (presiding) Mr. André Côté Mr. Lorne R. Bolton
Counsel for the Applicants: TELUS Advertising Services Inc. TELUS Advertising Services (Edmonton) Inc.
Jo’Anne Strekaf E. Bruce Mellett
Counsel for the Respondents: Director of Investigation and Research William J. Miller Elspeth A. Gullen
Anglo Canadian Telephone Company Direct West Publishers Ltd. The Manitoba Telephone System MT&T Holdings Incorporated Tele-Direct (Publications) Inc. Tele-Direct (Services) Inc.
Mark J. Nicholson
COMPETITION TRIBUNAL ORDER VARYING CONSENT ORDER DATED NOVEMBER 18, 1994
TELUS Advertising Services Inc. TELUS Advertising Services (Edmonton) Inc.
v. The Director of Investigation and Research et al.
FURTHER TO the application by TELUS Advertising Services Inc. and TELUS Advertising Services (Edmonton) Inc. pursuant to section 105 and paragraph 106(b) of the Competition Act (“Act”) for an order varying the Consent Order granted by the Tribunal on November 18, 1994;
AND ON READING the notice of application, the consent order impact statement, the affidavit of Michael Trebilcock and the consent of the parties, filed;
AND AFTER consultation with the parties by way of written questions and answers, filed, and by conference call with the presiding member on behalf of the panel;
AND ON NOTING that the application for a variation under paragraph 106(a) of the Act has been withdrawn by the applicants;
AND WITH the consent of all parties;
THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT: 1. Pursuant to section 49 of the Competition Tribunal Rules, the rules governing an application for a consent order shall not apply to this application for a variation on consent.
2. The Consent Order dated November 18, 1994 shall be varied as follows: (a) Edmonton Telephones Corporation shall be deleted and TELUS Advertising Services (Edmonton) Inc. shall be added as a party respondent to the Consent Order;
(b) TELUS Advertising Services Inc. shall be substituted for AGT Directory Ltd. as a party respondent to the Consent Order;
(c) Paragraph 3 of the Consent Order shall be revoked and replaced by the following: 3. With regard to the sale of national advertising in Yellow Pages telephone directories, each respondent shall be prohibited from:
(a) maintaining a head office rule for allocating advertisers; (b) maintaining exclusive selling arrangements with any other respondent, except that TELUS Advertising Services Inc. (“TELUS”) and TELUS Advertising Services (Edmonton) Inc. (“TELUS Edmonton”) may enter into exclusive selling arrangements with each other;
(c) refusing to deal with any selling company, except where the refusal is based upon reasonable and legitimate business concerns of a non-exclusionary nature;
(d) discriminating between selling companies acting in their capacity as selling companies, except where the discrimination is based upon reasonable and legitimate business concerns of a non-exclusionary nature and except that TELUS and TELUS Edmonton may discriminate in each other’s favour as selling companies;
(e) refusing to license selling companies having an office in and qualified to do business in Canada, for the proper use of Yellow Pages trademarks for the purpose of selling advertising in Yellow Pages telephone directories, provided that these companies enter into and maintain a commercially reasonable standard form of trademark licensing agreement;
(f) agreeing with any other respondent on the criteria for determining which national advertising accounts are commissionable, except that TELUS and TELUS Edmonton may agree with each other on such criteria;
(g) agreeing with any other respondent on the rate of commission payable, except during a transition period ending June 30, 1995 during which a minimum commission of 25% will be available to selling companies for national advertising which meets the commissionability criteria established by each respondent and except that TELUS and TELUS Edmonton may agree with each other on the rate of commission payable; and
(h) denying to selling companies access to any rates and data book style of publication that might continue to be, or in the future might be, compiled and distributed by and to the respondents under the auspices of CANYPS or otherwise by the respondents.
DATED at Ottawa, this 30 th day of May, 1997 SIGNED on behalf of the Tribunal by the presiding judicial member. (s) Marshall Rothstein Marshall Rothstein