The Ontario Superior Court of Justice has denied a request for an injunction by Bell Canada, the largest Canadian internet service provider, but has made important comments on the merits of an underlying action relating to comparative advertising of internet speed claims. Bell filed a Statement of Claim in June 2009 for over CDN$50 million in damages and a motion seeking an injunction, after one of its main competitors, Rogers, began a print and web advertising campaign entitled “Check your Speed”. Bell alleged that Rogers’ campaign improperly claimed: first, that the speed of the internet services advertised by Bell is higher than what customers actually receive; second, that customers should test their connection speed using an impartial third party test linked on Rogers’ website; and third, that Rogers provides more reliable internet speeds. A key issue for the court in deciding not to grant an injunction was that instead of directing customers to an independent testing service, Rogers had initially provided its own test using a server located in Seattle, Washington (Bell serves customers in Eastern Canada). However, after receiving the Statement of Claim Rogers took steps to remove the link to the Seattle test site. The Court agreed that a misleading impression was potentially created that the slower internet speed was due solely to Bell as opposed to the geographical distance between the testing site and users’ computers. However, it denied the injunction, finding that by removing the link Rogers rectified the most damaging portion of the campaign, and that Rogers’ legitimate interest in making commercial representations on the merits of competitors’ services outweighed the risk of ongoing harm to Bell. The Court also commented on the public interest in contributing to consumer education in a competitive market. The action is expected to proceed to trial in order to decide a range of competition, trade mark and tort issues.