CRTC has already ruled that this type of behaviour by BDU's is legal. There is a general deference amongst administrative tribunals and courts (Human Rights Tribunals excepted) to defer to the specific body responsible for the administration of a regulatory system. In other words, Competition Bureau will not insert their own read of the law in the face of the CRTC's read.
Second, Novus does not come to this complaint with clean hands. This issue arises only in buildings developed by Concord Pacific. Concord Pacific and Novus share common ownership. Concord Pacific locks Shaw out of these developments until after possession essentially handing the customer to Novus and providing them an advantage. It is not a level playing field. Shaw's promotional activity is a direct response to the marginal business practices of Concord Pacific and Novus.
Lastly, I said this before in this thread, why does this upset anyone? It happens in every business. Telcos loss lead promote against each other. Wireless companies do it. Newspapers to it. And on, and on, and on. Unless you're equally angry at your cell phone provider for the deal new subs get and you don't, you have no valid gripe against Shaw. If you are angry with your cell provider ... fair enough.