http://www.citt-tcce.gc.ca/en/node/8176
Correct me if I'm wrong but it looks to me like they based this decision off of the blade being slightly ajar. Point 2.
Whether the Goods in Issue Open Automatically by Centrifugal Force
- The Tribunal closely examined and tested the goods in issue at the file hearing of this matter. This included reviewing their packaging material and instructions, as well as opening and closing the knives repeatedly. When fully closed, the knives have a tendency to stay closed and do not open automatically with a mere flick of the wrist. However, they do open automatically when a flick of the wrist is accompanied with minimal manipulation by the thumb of either the flipper or other non-edged parts of the blade, such as the nail nick, to overcome the initial resistance. In fact, the instructions include directions on opening the blade without using the flipper, requiring only that the user “push gently outwards on the thumbstud”, referring to a part of the blade directly under the thumb when held in the closed position.[27]
- Once the blade is barely ajar, it easily, swiftly and readily swings into a fully opened and locked position with a simple, “slight flip of the wrist” as the instructions themselves confirm.[28] All of this can be accomplished in one simultaneous, single-handed movement with the wrist, thumb and forefinger.
- The Tribunal has ruled in prior cases that a knife may still open automatically by centrifugal force even if it requires some preliminary or simultaneous manipulation of a flipper or part of the blade.[29] In recent cases, it has also ruled that a knife may be a prohibited weapon if the flipper works in combination with a device, such as a torsion bar, to enable the knife to open automatically.[30] As found above, there is no such device (in the form of caged ball bearings) in these knives. However, the Tribunal has never ruled, and subsection 84(1) of the Criminal Code does not provide, that a knife only opens automatically by centrifugal force when no manipulation is required of any part of the knife. The swiftness and ease with which the goods in issue open is in no way inferior to that of other knives that do not start in a locked position. The Tribunal does not believe that Parliament would have intended, or that the text of the statute commands, that the former be treated any differently than the latter.
Unfortunately point 2 only describes the function of the flipper as it pertains to the operation of the kife. As part of my job training, I've read and analyzed several CITT decisions, as I could be called to act in a CITT case under certain circumstances (luckily I haven't had to yet, you can imagine how fun that would be)...
This sentence is very important:
"3. The Tribunal has ruled in prior cases that a knife may still open automatically by centrifugal force even if it requires some preliminary or simultaneous manipulation of a flipper or part of the blade."
Which means that they consider the knife as an "automatic" (thus prohibited) even if a slight manipulation of a flipper or thumb stud is required to deploy the blade. So it's not that the law only applies to knifes that are "ajar", it's that knives that require slight manipulation (so as to partially open them) before a flick of the wrist fully deploys the blade are considered to be automatic in the ruling.
It gets worse:
"In recent cases, it has also ruled that a knife may be a prohibited weapon if the flipper works in combination with a device, such as a torsion bar, to enable the knife to open automatically."
This means that an assisted-opening (benchmade axis or kershaw speedsafe for example) are considered "prohibited weapons" (just like automatic knives by the way).
Their definition of "automatic" now includes any knife that can be deployed from the flick of a wrist, whether you have to help the blade out or not as you're opening it, or any assisted knife.
Complete and utter nanny-statism bullshit. Luckily for us, the CITT's jurisdiction is limited to matters of international trade, and it has no jurisdiction in our criminal justice system within Canada.
With the current government in place however, I wouldn't be surprised if a similar ruling would occur within Canada.
EDIT:
The decision appears to contradict the following decision:
http://www.citt.gc.ca/en/node/8051 - This decision concludes that an assisted knife with thumbs studs only is not considered to be a prohibited weapon.
http://www.citt.gc.ca/en/node/7917 - This decision concludes that an assisted knife with a flipper is considered to be a prohibited weapon. This is the decision referred to in the decision that is the subject of this thread.
Different decisions, different verdicts.
So, in short:
Assisted knife with thumb studs only: Not a prohibited weapon and allowed to be imported.
Flipper, assisted or manual: Classified as a prohibited weapon and will be seized at the border if intercepted by an agent.
That all makes sense...