Decision Summaries CT-2008-006

Case name: Canadian Standard Travel Agent Registry v. International Air Transport Association doing business as IATA
Case #: CT-2008-006
Date rendered: 2008-06-17
Presiding judicial member: Madam Justice Simpson

This Decision Summary is also available in 'PDF' format :  

INFORMATION NOTE*

Canadian Standard Travel Agent Registry v. International Air Transport Association doing business as IATA

June 17, 2008. The Competition Tribunal issued its reasons and order in Canadian Standard Travel Agent Registry doing business as CSTAR v. International Air Transport Association doing business as IATA. CSTAR had applied to the Competition Tribunal pursuant to section 103.1 of the Competition Act, for leave to bring an application under section 75 of the Act. CSTAR also sought leave to bring an application for designation by the Tribunal as a representative of 146 IATA-accredited travel agencies.

CSTAR, a non profit trade association representing travel agencies across Canada, alleged that neutral airline paper tickets were essential to the business of IATA-accredited travel agencies and that IATA's implementation of an international initiative moving towards exclusive E-ticketing by eliminating neutral paper airline tickets would have a direct and substantial effect on the business of the travel agencies CSTAR represents. CSTAR sought leave to bring an application for an order and an interim order requiring IATA to continue to supply IATA-accredited travel agencies with neutral airline paper tickets.

The application for an interim order was dismissed as the international initiative moving toward exclusive E-ticketing had been implemented to a point where an order requiring the continued use of neutral airline paper tickets in Canada would be ineffective or unenforceable.

The Tribunal also dismissed the application for leave as CSTAR, itself, was not directly and substantially affected in its business by the elimination of neutral paper airline tickets. The application was dismissed without prejudice to a further application dealing with the same issues by a party that is directly and substantially affected by the practice. If leave were given, it would then be open to that party to seek representative status.


* This is an unofficial summary prepared by the Registry of the Tribunal.