The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed an $825 million anti-trust lawsuit against the NHL and junior hockey leagues. Former players alleged breach of the Competition Act..“The statement of claim alleging as it does a conspiracy between leagues, and between leagues and other organizations, has no chance of success,” wrote Justice Donald Rennie..League lawyers called the lawsuit “an existential threat to the future of major junior hockey in Canada.”.According to Blacklock's Reporter, Kobe Mohr of Lethbridge, AB., a former winger with the Edmonton Oil Kings, was lead plaintiff in the case. Mohr claimed league managers breached the act in conspiring to “limit the opportunities of hockey players,” the court was told..Section 48 of the act forbids “arrangements between or among teams and clubs engaged in professional sport as members of the same league.”.The law could not apply to agreements between the Western Canada Hockey League, Ontario and Québec junior leagues and East Coast Hockey League, the Court ruled..“The phrase ‘as members of the same league’ must be given its plain, ordinary and otherwise clear meaning,” wrote Rennie..“Inter-league agreements are not ‘between or among teams and clubs engaged in professional sports as members of the same league.’”.The players’ lawyers are expected to attempt an appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada. Damage claims of $825 million represented “economic losses suffered as a result of the alleged conspiracy” for thousands of players who’d worked in the leagues, they said..“Section 48 prohibits agreements or arrangements which unreasonably limit the opportunities of a player to participate in professional sport, impose unreasonable terms on players or unreasonably limit the ability of players to negotiate with and play with a team of their choice,” wrote Rennie..“The purpose of section 48 is to protect freedom of employment for players.”.The sports clause dates back to 1975. It has never been used in a prosecution of any club or league in Canada..The National Hockey League, a co-defendant in the Kobe Mohr lawsuit, lobbied against the clause..“This legislation if passed in its present form would lead to the dissolution of all professional leagues in Canada,” then-NHL President Clarence Campbell said at the time..“I hardly think players are being used when $35,000 of benefits, salary, pension and all accrue to the average NHL player.”.The Competition Bureau in a July 5 statement said it was reviewing the sports clause..“Among other issues there is concern that section 48 lacks definitions for ambiguous terms,” wrote the Bureau.
The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed an $825 million anti-trust lawsuit against the NHL and junior hockey leagues. Former players alleged breach of the Competition Act..“The statement of claim alleging as it does a conspiracy between leagues, and between leagues and other organizations, has no chance of success,” wrote Justice Donald Rennie..League lawyers called the lawsuit “an existential threat to the future of major junior hockey in Canada.”.According to Blacklock's Reporter, Kobe Mohr of Lethbridge, AB., a former winger with the Edmonton Oil Kings, was lead plaintiff in the case. Mohr claimed league managers breached the act in conspiring to “limit the opportunities of hockey players,” the court was told..Section 48 of the act forbids “arrangements between or among teams and clubs engaged in professional sport as members of the same league.”.The law could not apply to agreements between the Western Canada Hockey League, Ontario and Québec junior leagues and East Coast Hockey League, the Court ruled..“The phrase ‘as members of the same league’ must be given its plain, ordinary and otherwise clear meaning,” wrote Rennie..“Inter-league agreements are not ‘between or among teams and clubs engaged in professional sports as members of the same league.’”.The players’ lawyers are expected to attempt an appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada. Damage claims of $825 million represented “economic losses suffered as a result of the alleged conspiracy” for thousands of players who’d worked in the leagues, they said..“Section 48 prohibits agreements or arrangements which unreasonably limit the opportunities of a player to participate in professional sport, impose unreasonable terms on players or unreasonably limit the ability of players to negotiate with and play with a team of their choice,” wrote Rennie..“The purpose of section 48 is to protect freedom of employment for players.”.The sports clause dates back to 1975. It has never been used in a prosecution of any club or league in Canada..The National Hockey League, a co-defendant in the Kobe Mohr lawsuit, lobbied against the clause..“This legislation if passed in its present form would lead to the dissolution of all professional leagues in Canada,” then-NHL President Clarence Campbell said at the time..“I hardly think players are being used when $35,000 of benefits, salary, pension and all accrue to the average NHL player.”.The Competition Bureau in a July 5 statement said it was reviewing the sports clause..“Among other issues there is concern that section 48 lacks definitions for ambiguous terms,” wrote the Bureau.
