Month: March 2025

Have you ever bought something online, only to be surprised by hidden fees at checkout? That’s exactly what happened to Canadian moviegoers when Cineplex introduced an online booking fee—without making it clear upfront. In this episode of the Queen’s Law Pro Bono Radio Podcast, host Louna Aboud breaks down the landmark decision in Canada (Commissioner of Competition) v. Cineplex Inc., where the Competition Tribunal found Cineplex guilty of deceptive marketing under Canada’s Competition Act.

We explore what competition law in Canada is designed to protect and enforce, as well as how drip pricing—the practice of advertising a price that is unattainable due to hidden mandatory fees—violates these principles. We examine the facts of the case, including how Cineplex’s pricing strategy misled consumers and why the Tribunal ultimately ruled against the company, ordering it to pay a $38.9 million fine. Additionally, we discuss the broader implications of this decision, particularly how it could impact Canadian businesses, strengthen consumer protection, and set a precedent for future enforcement of pricing transparency.

This case is the first to test Canada’s new drip pricing provisions, making it a major milestone in competition law enforcement. Will this decision lead to better pricing transparency across industries? What does it mean for companies engaging in similar practices? Tune in to find out how this ruling could change the way businesses advertise their prices—and what it means for you as a consumer.

Louna Aboud – Producer, host, editor

Music by: https://pixabay.com/users/backgroundmusicforvideos-46459014/

Pro Bono Radio is part of the Queen’s chapter of Pro Bono Students Canada. The Pro Bono Radio team are not lawyers, and this is not legal advice.

Subscribe to this podcast on Apple Podcasts, Google Play, Spotify and Stitcher!

Research Referred to in the Podcast: 

Competition Act, RSC, 1985, c. C-35. 

Canada (Commissioner of Competition) v Cineplex Inc, 2024 Comp Trib 5. 

Canada (Commissioner of Competition) v Premier Career Management Group Corp. 2009 FCA 295. 

Competition Bureau, “Competition Bureau wins deceptive marketing case against Cineplex”, 23 September 2024, online (news release), <https://www.canada.ca/en/competition-bureau/news/2024/09/competition-bureau-wins-deceptive-marketing-case-against-cineplex.html> 

CBC News, “Cineplex says it will appeal $38.9M fine over $1.50 online booking fee”, (last updated 25 September 2024) 23 September 2024, online (website), https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/cineplex-online-booking-fee-fine-1.7332024

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

In 2022, the Ontario Superior Court released the decision of Ahluwalia v Ahulwalia (Ahluwalia), which recognized “family violence as a new tort. Mrs. Ahluwalia argued that there are no existing torts that recognize the pattern of emotional, physical, and financial abuse she suffered throughout their marriage. Given this, the trial judge recognized a new tort of “family violence” to appropriately compensate her for the harm suffered.

On appeal, the Ontario Court of Appeal, overturned this decision and rejected the creation of the new tort. Justice Benotto reasoned that existing torts, such as assault and battery, are enough for family violence victims to recover. The case has since been referred to the Supreme Court of Canada and is currently in progress.

In this episode, Aisha and Reine explore the decision in Ahluwalia and the need for a new tort to cover coercive patterns of abuse with their guest Professor Mary Jo Maur. Professor Maur’s research focuses on improving family law procedural system to better serve all parties in a family law dispute. After a deep dive into the current state of tort law, and the Ontario Superior Court and Court of Appeal decisions, the episode considers the future role of tort law in addressing family violence.

Will current torts be an adequate resource for family violence victims to claim recover for harm suffered or will there be a need to adopt a new tort?

Aisha Khalif and Reine Lolas – Producers, Hosts, Editors

Pro Bono Radio is part of the Queen’s chapter of Pro Bono Students Canada. The Pro Bono Radio team are not lawyers, and this is not legal advice.

Subscribe to this podcast on Apple Podcasts, Google Play, Spotify and Stitcher!

Research Referred to in the Podcast:

Ahluwalia v Ahluwalia, 2023 ONCA 476

Amnesty International, “Open Letter: Coalition of 100+ Organizations Urge Ontario to Declare Intimate Partner Violence an Epidemic” (2024) https://amnesty.ca/human-rights-news/open-letter100-organizations-call-for-a-declaration-of-intimate-partner-violence-as-an-epidemic-in-ontario/

Garrett, Sarah M, “Coercive Control Legislation: Using the Tort System to Empower Survivors of Domestic Violence” (2023) 111:5 California law review 1601–1632.

LEAF, “Ahluwalia v Ahluwalia” (2024),  https://www.leaf.ca/case_summary/ahluwalia-v-ahluwalia/

Maur, Mary-Jo, “The Ontario Court of Appeal’s Decision in Ahluwalia v. Ahluwalia – Prudence? Or Opportunity Missed?” (2023) 42:2 Canadian family law quarterly 107–129.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS