The respondent, a supplier of lightweight aggregate, sued the appellants for the tort of conspiracy to injure after the appellants ceased using its product.
The appellants had previously pleaded guilty to conspiring to lessen competition in the concrete market contrary to the Combines Investigation Act.
The trial judge and Court of Appeal found for the respondent, holding that the appellants' unlawful conduct eliminated the respondent as a competitor, even without a specific intent to injure it.
The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal, holding that the tort of conspiracy requires either a predominant purpose to injure the plaintiff, or unlawful conduct directed at the plaintiff where injury is likely.
The Court found no such intent or directed conduct here, and concluded the respondent's business failure was caused by market forces rather than the appellants' conspiracy.
