MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2629377882

Consumer Protection Through Competition Law: Civil and Practical Analysis of Canadian and European Positions

2016· article· en· W2629377882 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Benjamin Lehaire

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue internationale de droit economique · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean and International Contract Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompetition lawLawPublic lawCommercial lawConsumer protectionPrivate lawMunicipal lawCommon lawCivil law (Civil law)Political scienceComparative lawCriminal lawEconomicsLaw and economicsMonopoly
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Competition law contributes to protecting consumers. European competition law proves to be the link between competition law and consumer law. The single market needs protection for European consumers. Nonetheless, not all occidental countries know this link between consumer law and competition law. Canadian competition law illustrates this issue. Indeed, constitutional barriers explain this difficulty. The Canadian parliament has the legislative power to regulate trade and commerce, but also criminal law. So Canadian competition law has been taking power in the regulation of trade and in criminal law. In Canada, consumer protection is provided by the provinces that can make laws to protect consumer contracts. This power is based on the power of the Canadian provinces in civil law. The Quebec civil code and the Consumer Protection Act of this province shows this competence. There is, in Canada, a direct protection of consumers by the provinces, like in Quebec, and an indirect protection by federal competition law. For example, misleading advertising is punished under the criminal rules of competition law. Another aspect of this subject is the private enforcement of competition law. Section 36 of the competition law permits the consumer to sue a person who engages in conduct that is contrary to any provision of the criminal part of the law. The constitutional validity of this section was disputed in the Canadian Supreme Court. For the court, Section 36 was constitutional. Consequently, this section protects the consumer directly against a violation of competition law. This paper tries to identify how civil law, particularly in Quebec, can be used to improve the protection of consumers in the area of competition. Competition damages are one of the solutions that can be explored. In this context, a comparison is made with European law. Directive 2014/104 shows that consumer protection can take place in competition law. In a civil law system, such as France, the introduction of collective redress demonstrates that there may be a link between consumer law and competition law. This article finally shows that consumer protection occurs at two levels. The supranational law ensures healthy competition in the market and consumer safety. National law protects consumers in contractual relations. We find this situation in Canada and in the European Union. However, these two legal systems reconcile consumer law and competition law by the private enforcement of competition law. This article explores this new reality.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.947
Threshold uncertainty score0.947

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue internationale de droit economiqueSame topicEuropean and International Contract LawFrench-language works237,207