Law360 Canada ( June 9, 2026, 9:40 AM EDT) -- Appeal by Rogers Communications Inc. (Rogers) from a decision of the Competition Tribunal (Tribunal) denying, in part, Rogers’ motion for leave to amend its Response to the Commissioner of Competition’s (Commissioner) Notice of Application. Motion by Rogers to adduce fresh evidence. The underlying Tribunal proceeding concerned allegations that Rogers’ marketing of its Infinite wireless plans was deceptive, because the plans did not provide unlimited high speed data. After the Commissioner commenced the application, Rogers learned on discovery that the Competition Bureau (Bureau) had conducted and closed an internal investigation in 2020 into similar unlimited data representations by Rogers and other carriers, concluding no enforcement action was warranted. Rogers sought to amend its Response to plead facts about that prior investigation and its own attempts to engage the Commissioner before and after launching the plans, arguing those facts were relevant to remedy and the assessment of any administrative monetary penalty (AMP), particularly with respect to duration of conduct, vulnerability of consumers, and Rogers’ compliance history. Gagné J. denied leave, finding the proposed amendments irrelevant to remedy and incapable of supporting estoppel or waiver defences. On appeal, Rogers argued the Tribunal applied the wrong legal test by focusing on relevance rather than the low reasonable prospect of success threshold for amendments and erred in concluding the prior investigation and delay were irrelevant to remedy. The Commissioner responded that the Tribunal applied the correct test, that relevance was a component of the amendment threshold, and that the proposed pleadings improperly sought to put the Commissioner’s investigative conduct in issue rather than Rogers’ marketing conduct....