Videotron Ltée. v. Netstar Communications Inc., 2002 FCA 467

Date: 20021122

Docket:02-A-24

Neutral citation: 2002 FCA 467

PRESENT:      PELLETIER J.A.

BETWEEN:

                                                                 VIDÉOTRON LTÉE

and

QUEBECOR MÉDIA INC.

                                                                                                                                                      Applicants

                                                                                 and

                                               NETSTAR COMMUNICATIONS INC.

LE RÉSEAU DES SPORTS (RDS) INC.

and

BELL GLOBEMEDIA INC.

                                                                                                                                               Respondents

                                           Dealt with in writing without appearance of parties.

                                  Order delivered at Ottawa, Ontario, on November 22, 2002.

REASONS FOR ORDER BY:                                                                                         PELLETIER J.A.

Date: 20021122

Docket: 02-A-24

Neutral citation: 2002 FCA 467

Present:           PELLETIER J.A.

BETWEEN:

                                                                 VIDÉOTRON LTÉE

and

QUEBECOR MÉDIA INC.

                                                                                                                                                      Applicants

                                                                                 and

                                               NETSTAR COMMUNICATIONS INC.

LE RÉSEAU DES SPORTS (RDS) INC.

and

BELL GLOBEMEDIA INC.

                                                                                                                                               Respondents

                                                            REASONS FOR ORDER

[1]                 This is an application for a confidentiality order pursuant to Rule 151 of the Federal Court Rules, 1998, SOR/98-106. The fact which takes it out of the ordinary run of things is that it is made in the course of an application for leave to appeal.

[2]                 This motion is in support of a companion motion in which Vidéotron Ltée ("Vidéotron") and Quebecor Média Inc. ("Quebecor") seek leave to appeal decisions CRTC 2002-255 and CRTC 2002-254 of the Canadian Radio-Telecommunications Commission ("CRTC"). In decision CRTC 2002-255, the CRTC decided that Vidéotron contravened Section 9 of the Broadcasting Distribution Regulations, SOR/97-555 by giving itself an undue preference and subjecting Le Réseau des Sports (RDS) Inc. and Netstar Communications Inc. to an undue disadvantage by unilaterally reducing the fees which were due to the latter pursuant to an affiliation agreement between Vidéotron and RDS. The CRTC required Vidéotron to pay the amounts which it had unilaterally withheld, an amount which it subsequently determined to be some $10,000,000.

[3]                 In decision CRTC 2002-254, the CRTC dismissed a complaint by Vidéotron that RDS contravened Section 10.1 of theSpecialty Services Regulations, 1990, SOR/90-106 by tolerating ExpressVu's practice of offering multiple terminals for a single subscription, thereby foregoing revenue in favour of ExpressVu, an advantage which it did not offer to Vidéotron, thereby giving an undue preference to ExpressVu and subjecting Vidéotron to an undue competitive disadvantage.

[4]                 In support of their application for leave to appeal, Vidéotron and Quebecor filed the Affidavit of Edouard Trépannier to which were annexed 2 agreements namely, "Contrat d'affiliation entre Netstar Communications Inc. au nom de RDS, TSN et Discovery Channel et le Groupe Vidéotron Ltée au nom de Vidéotron Ltée." and "Contrat d'affiliation entre Netstar Communications Inc. au nom de RDS, TSN et Discovery Channel et CF Câble TV Inc. en son nom et au nom de TDM Newco Inc. et Laurentien Câble TV Inc.". The confidentiality order is sought with respect to these two documents. A confidentiality order is sought with respect to these two documents. It does not appear that these documents were before the CRTC when it made the decisions in respect of which leave to appeal is now sought. They are put before the Court for the stated purpose of providing " the contracts to the Court of Appeal so as to complete the record for the Notice of Motion for Leave to Appeal and for the Court's scrutiny for any confidentiality order sought". The second question only arises if the applicants are entitled to place the documents before the Court for purposes of the application for leave to appeal.

[5]                 I have difficulty conceiving how the agreements in question can be considered necessary to the determination of the motion for leave to appeal if they were not thought to be necessary to the resolution of the proceedings before the CRTC.    There may be circumstances where it is necessary to put before the Court, on an application for leave, material which was not before the original tribunal but this is not one of them. The "Most Favoured Nation" clause on which the applicants relied is already before the Court. The agreements in question are not properly before the Court and should be returned to the applicants. In the circumstances, the motion for a confidentiality order is moot and will therefore be dismissed.

                    "J.D. Denis Pelletier"                                                                                                                                           J.A.

                                                    FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA

                                                                 APPEAL DIVISION

                      NAMES OF SOLICITORS AND SOLICITORS ON THE RECORD

COURT FILE NO.:                           02-A-24

STYLE OF CAUSE:                           VIDÉOTRON LTÉE and QUEBECOR MÉDIA INC.

v. NETSTAR COMMUNICATIONS INC. LE RÉSEAU DES SPORTS (RDS) INC. and BELL GLOBEMEDIA INC.

MOTION DEALT WITH IN WRITING

WITHOUT THE APPEARANCE OF PARTIES

REASONS FOR ORDER:              PELLETIER J.A.

DATED:                                                November 22, 2002

WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS BY:

Mr. Daniel Urbas                                                                            FOR APPLICANTS

Mr. Gérald R. Tremblay                                                                FOR RESPONDENTS

SOLICITORS ON THE RECORD:                                                                                                      

Woods & Parters

Montreal, Quebec                                                                          FOR APPLICANTS

McCarthy Tétrault S.R.L.

Montreal, Quebec                                                                          FOR RESPONDENTS