Film Weekly year book of the Canadian motion picture industry (1951)

in 1949 circuits of 20-and-over control¬ led 466 theatres and got 58.8 per cent of the national receipts, circuits of 4-to19 theatres controlled 193 theatres and got 12.0 per cent, those of two and three theatres operated a total of 248 and took in 9.6 per cent, and onetheatre operators with a total of 1,293 locations grossed 19.6 per cent. The two smallest groups include several hun¬ dred 16 mm. locations. Both Famous Players Canadian Cor¬ poration and Odeon Theatres (Canada) Limited are public companies. Expenditure on theatrical production in Canada in 1950 probably amounts to more than a million dollars, several hundred thousand dollars of which came from Hollywood companies on location. Non-theatrical production, led by the National Film Board, is estimated at about the same amount. TRADE PRACTICES ALTHOUGH SOME of the conditions ^ declared illegal by the Supreme Court of the United States exist in Canada, the court war in the USA in¬ dustry has not caused much unrest here. Canadian exhibitors have been busy sharing the prosperity of their expand¬ ing industry. In 1931 an investigation into an alleged combine in the Canadian motion picture industry, conducted by a government commissioner, found nothing to warrant restrictive action. During the first couple of years of World War II the Independents formed a national organization which sought certain favorable rulings from the com¬ missioner appointed to govern it by the Wartime Prices and Trade Board. There was also an eruption over the Standard Licence Agreement several years ago but this died out. There was ARBITRATION 'T'HE CANADIAN motion picture industry adopted arbitration in 1922, when it placed an arbitration clause in all contracts between the distributor and the exhibitor and it is now part of the standard Canadian License Agreement. Since its inception the procedure in ar¬ bitration has been modified in only two particulars. At first there were three arbitrators for each side — a total of six. The board now consists of two and an umpire is called in if necessary. The second change in the arbitration clause gave the claimant the choice of going to the courts or to a board. The defendant has no choice. Should one of the parties disagree with the decision of the board members or the umpire, he may make known his opposition at the time it is being submitted to the courts one lawsuit between an exhibitor and distributor over alleged loss of product but the writ was withdrawn before it went to court in British Columbia. In a number of cases the same in¬ terests control both theatre circuits and film exchanges but this has not been made a point of difference in trade arguments. Canadian production has yielded the greatest inter-trade battle. Producers who belong to the Association of Motion Picture Producers and Laboratories of Canada have long demanded that they have the right to deal with government departments direct instead of through the National Film Board. They also maintain that the government film agency has no right to make films that can be made as well by private firms. IN CANADA fcr confirmation and have his position judged. Following is the arbitration clause of the Canadian License Agreement: “The parties hereto agree that if any question or difference shall arise be¬ tween them with respect to the rights, duties or obligations of either of them hereunder or as to any other matter arising out of this agreement, the same shall be determined, at the option of the claimant, either by a Court of com¬ petent jurisdiction in the Province in which is situated the exchange of the Distributor from which the Exhibitor is served or by arbitration to be conducted in accordance with the Rules of Arbitra¬ tion dated June 1st, 1937, filed with the Motion Picture Distributors and Exhibi¬ tors of Canada, or if the question or dif 47