Court decision gives AC gates at YYZ TNew
Feb 23, 2004, 3:44 pm
#1
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 20,550
Feb 23, 2004, 4:12 pm
#2
At Large
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: oakville Ontario canada;AC*SE
Posts: 16,985
I hope AC wins this totally; screw WS and their underhanded tactics with sleazy Turpin and his expensive palace.....let them compete in the real marketplace elbows and all see if they make it. Up until now they have had a free ride with AC's problems.
Feb 23, 2004, 4:36 pm
#4
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 1,656
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by parnel:
I hope AC wins this totally; screw WS and their underhanded tactics with sleazy Turpin and his expensive palace.....let them compete in the real marketplace elbows and all see if they make it. Up until now they have had a free ride with AC's problems.</font>
I hope AC wins this totally; screw WS and their underhanded tactics with sleazy Turpin and his expensive palace.....let them compete in the real marketplace elbows and all see if they make it. Up until now they have had a free ride with AC's problems.</font>
[This message has been edited by Fisch (edited Feb 23, 2004).]
Feb 23, 2004, 4:40 pm
#5
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: YEG - No Particular Loyalty Anymore
Posts: 3,610
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by parnel:
...let them compete in the real marketplace elbows and all see if they make it....</font>
...let them compete in the real marketplace elbows and all see if they make it....</font>
Only poorly-managed businesses end up in CCAA or Chapter 11....the overwhelmingly vast majority of businesses - and individuals - don't resort to court protection.
[This message has been edited by PunishedEdmontonian (edited Feb 23, 2004).]
Feb 23, 2004, 4:43 pm
#6
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: somewhere north of stateside...
Posts: 4,158
While I don't completely agree with parnel, I do think that the GTAA was pretty sleazy with this whole business. AC (and their pax) have put up with crappy, old T1/2 for the last number of years. Now, WS was going to get gates in T-NEW and AC domestic ops would have to be split? What a joke. AC took T1/2 so that they would get T-NEW first.
The GTAA shouldn't have given any of those gates to WS to begin. Besides, WS is better off (as a still relatively small operator at Pearson) to keep both their domestic and transborder ops in T3 (which is still a great terminal).
The GTAA shouldn't have given any of those gates to WS to begin. Besides, WS is better off (as a still relatively small operator at Pearson) to keep both their domestic and transborder ops in T3 (which is still a great terminal).
Feb 23, 2004, 4:49 pm
#7
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Programs: OWEmerald; STARGold; BonvoyPlat; IHGPlat/Amb; HiltonGold; A|ClubPat; AirMilesPlat
Posts: 38,186
Not likely to get beyond the Ontario Court of Appeal as this is a breach of contract and not a matter for the Supreme Court of Canada. And that Court is likely to uphold the decision if this judge found there was a material breach of contract by the GTAA. In the real world, it is also unlikely that the appeal court could deal with the matter before the early April opening date for T1New.
Good decision for travellers, and a comuppance to the arrogant worms at the GTAA. Wonder if Clive will now want out of his move to YYZ?
Good decision for travellers, and a comuppance to the arrogant worms at the GTAA. Wonder if Clive will now want out of his move to YYZ?
Feb 23, 2004, 5:00 pm
#8
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,665
I once got on the phone to GTAA to complain about aircraft noise and next thing you know I am on their mailing list. I get their glossy "GTAA Update" with thick covers, and full of articles congratulating themselves on having the world's biggest this and that and their incredible insights on terminal building. The Terminal Improvement Fee is certainly being spent on substance - and now on lawyers.
[This message has been edited by B1 (edited Feb 23, 2004).]
[This message has been edited by B1 (edited Feb 23, 2004).]
Feb 23, 2004, 5:02 pm
#9
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: YEG - No Particular Loyalty Anymore
Posts: 3,610
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Shareholder:
Not likely to get beyond the Ontario Court of Appeal as this is a breach of contract and not a matter for the Supreme Court of Canada. And that Court is likely to uphold the decision if this judge found there was a material breach of contract by the GTAA. In the real world, it is also unlikely that the appeal court could deal with the matter before the early April opening date for T1New.
Good decision for travellers, and a comuppance to the arrogant worms at the GTAA. Wonder if Clive will now want out of his move to YYZ?
</font>
Not likely to get beyond the Ontario Court of Appeal as this is a breach of contract and not a matter for the Supreme Court of Canada. And that Court is likely to uphold the decision if this judge found there was a material breach of contract by the GTAA. In the real world, it is also unlikely that the appeal court could deal with the matter before the early April opening date for T1New.
Good decision for travellers, and a comuppance to the arrogant worms at the GTAA. Wonder if Clive will now want out of his move to YYZ?
</font>
Feb 23, 2004, 5:06 pm
#10
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: YYC
Programs: AC Basic, UA MP Gold, Marriott Gold Elite, SPG Gold, Amex Platinum
Posts: 3,008
The judges handwritten comments can be viewed here:
http://www.stikeman.com/ac/uploads/reasonsgtaa.pdf
I like the last sentence on page 29, "Subject to edit if typed up. Please communicate with my secretary......".
Last page also states that this decision can be reviewed again in six months.
The decision does not prevent WS from operating out of TNew for processing facilities and then bussing passengers to the T2 gates AC was trying to avoid, so we could still see WS in TNew in April.
http://www.stikeman.com/ac/uploads/reasonsgtaa.pdf
I like the last sentence on page 29, "Subject to edit if typed up. Please communicate with my secretary......".
Last page also states that this decision can be reviewed again in six months.
The decision does not prevent WS from operating out of TNew for processing facilities and then bussing passengers to the T2 gates AC was trying to avoid, so we could still see WS in TNew in April.
Feb 23, 2004, 5:13 pm
#11
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Thanks for the Memories !!!
Posts: 10,658
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by PunishedEdmontonian:
Stick to what you know. This is a major CCAA decision and the SCC has yet to really weigh in on the powers of a judge like Farley to make orders like this in such a summary fashion without a full trial of the issues raised.
</font>
Stick to what you know. This is a major CCAA decision and the SCC has yet to really weigh in on the powers of a judge like Farley to make orders like this in such a summary fashion without a full trial of the issues raised.
</font>
Feb 23, 2004, 5:14 pm
#12
Suspended
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Toronto YYZ UA-1K 1MM,QFgold
Programs: Royal Ambassador/ SPG Platinum 75/Marriott gold
Posts: 14,283
UGH so far Air Canada is our ??? UGH Flag Carrier, does it not make sense when promoting tourism etc that we put our BEST foot forward and give AC the New Terminal?
All of us benefit when AC brings in Tourists, god give AC a break.
If we GET PE a letter form AC saying we are sorry Calgary grew to be a bigger city, will you stop *****ing about AC.
UGH give WJ the other terminal, its Terminal 3 how bad can it be????
All of us benefit when AC brings in Tourists, god give AC a break.
If we GET PE a letter form AC saying we are sorry Calgary grew to be a bigger city, will you stop *****ing about AC.
UGH give WJ the other terminal, its Terminal 3 how bad can it be????
Feb 23, 2004, 5:23 pm
#13
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Thanks for the Memories !!!
Posts: 10,658
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by why fly:
UGH so far Air Canada is our ??? UGH Flag Carrier, does it not make sense when promoting tourism etc that we put our BEST foot forward and give AC the New Terminal?
All of us benefit when AC brings in Tourists, god give AC a break.
If we GET PE a letter form AC saying we are sorry Calgary grew to be a bigger city, will you stop *****ing about AC.
UGH give WJ the other terminal, its Terminal 3 how bad can it be????</font>
UGH so far Air Canada is our ??? UGH Flag Carrier, does it not make sense when promoting tourism etc that we put our BEST foot forward and give AC the New Terminal?
All of us benefit when AC brings in Tourists, god give AC a break.
If we GET PE a letter form AC saying we are sorry Calgary grew to be a bigger city, will you stop *****ing about AC.
UGH give WJ the other terminal, its Terminal 3 how bad can it be????</font>
Feb 23, 2004, 5:25 pm
#14
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: somewhere north of stateside...
Posts: 4,158
Hell, if WS wants to be in the new terminal, let them in as well. Just do that in a couple of years when more gates open up.
Forcing AC to split their domestic ops would be the worst thing for YYZ, AC, and the GTAA. You can't blame Clive for wanting in... WS would likely benefit. You also can't blame Uncle Milton for fighting back.
Maybe we should organise a charity boxing match?
Forcing AC to split their domestic ops would be the worst thing for YYZ, AC, and the GTAA. You can't blame Clive for wanting in... WS would likely benefit. You also can't blame Uncle Milton for fighting back.
Maybe we should organise a charity boxing match?