|
''General Motors of Canada Ltd v City National Leasing'' is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision on the scope of the Trade and Commerce power of the Constitution Act, 1867 as well as the interpretation of the Ancillary doctrine. ==Background== From 1970 through 1980, General Motors (GM) sold vehicles to both City National Leasing (CNL) and to CNL's competitors. It was discovered that GM, through General Motors Acceptance Corporation, was giving CNL's competitor a better interest rate than CNL. CNL contended that this was a practice of price discrimination contrary to s. 34(1)(a) of the ''Combines Investigation Act'', giving it a cause for action under s. 31.1 of the Act. It sued GM for lost profits, related interest, and breach of contract for damages arising after March 1980. In its defence, GM argued that: : * certain paragraphs of the statement of claim should be struck out as disclosing no cause of action because GM had never made any sales directly to CNL or to its competitors, and thus s. 34(1)(a) of the Act did not apply : * s. 31.1 is ''ultra vires'' Parliament, being in pith and substance legislation in relation to provincial jurisdiction for property and civil rights and matters of a local or private nature : * alternatively, if s. 31.1 is valid, it is not retrospective and therefore gives a cause of action only after its proclamation on January 1, 1976. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「General Motors of Canada Ltd v City National Leasing」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|