Canada: Federal Court Reasons In Sentencing Decision Create Uncertainty For Canadian Competition Bureau's Leniency Program

Reasons delivered by Chief Justice Paul Crampton of the Federal Court of Canada in relation to sentencing an accused corporation in R. v. Maxzone Auto Parts (Canada) Corp. create uncertainty for entities considering use of the Competition Bureau's Leniency Program in relation to cartel offences under the Competition Act.

Although Crampton C.J. accepted the joint sentencing submission of the prosecutor and the accused in this case, he made additional comments not necessary for his ruling (and therefore not having the full force of precedent), but which were expressly intended to alter future expectations about the Court's approach to joint sentencing submissions. The reasons suggest that, before accepting a joint sentence proposal pursuant to a plea agreement, the Court may require the record to include significantly enhanced public disclosure of facts and factors beyond the scope of what has traditionally been included in prior sentencing proceedings pursuant to the Leniency Program. For example, the Chief Justice calls for future sentencing submissions to include estimates of both actual and intended effects of the illegal conduct (including not only agreed or contemplated price increases, but potentially also the "deadweight loss" resulting from purchasers substituting to less desirable products), as well as information concerning a range of aggravating factors (such as the accused's degree of planning and covertness, whether the accused was a "ringleader" of the cartel, and whether victims were particularly vulnerable). The reasons also suggest that higher fines may be appropriate where a corporate plea is not accompanied by a plea and term of imprisonment for one or more individual company representatives in Canada. Further uncertainty regarding the operation of the Leniency Program also arises from the suggestion that a Court may not consider restitution to have been addressed by pending private actions and that accused entities ought to settle private actions before proceeding with a guilty plea.

Whether the reasons in this case will influence the approach to prosecuting cartel offences in Canada remains to be seen. If the Bureau were to adopt the principles suggested by these reasons, the Bureau would be facing a significantly increased investigatory burden before it is in a position to proceed with a plea agreement and joint sentencing submission. In order to satisfy the expectations of both the Court and the leniency applicant, the Bureau may also have to consider whether it is willing to delay Court proceedings to approve joint sentencing proposals made pursuant to the Leniency Program until after related private actions have been resolved.

It also remains to be seen whether other judges or Courts will consider it appropriate to pursue the approach suggested by Crampton C.J., or how this approach might be applied in practice. (Indictments and pleas for Competition Act offences can be, and often are, heard in Provincial Courts as well as the Federal Court.) If the Chief Justice's views are adopted by the Courts, the result may be less use of the Leniency Program and more contested proceedings in respect of Competition Act cartel offences.


The first party that discloses an offence and cooperates with the Bureau is eligible for complete immunity under the Bureau's Immunity Program. Parties who agree to plead guilty and cooperate with the Bureau after another party has already received immunity are eligible for reduced fine recommendations under the Leniency Program. The Bureau's Leniency Program states that the first and second applicants who qualify for leniency are eligible for a 50% and 30% reduction, respectively, of the fine that would have otherwise been recommended by the Bureau to the Public Prosecution Service of Canada (PPSC). Subsequent applicants receive reductions based on the relative timeliness of their cooperation.

Under the Bureau's Leniency Program, the usual starting point for a recommended fine is 20% of the cartel participant's affected volume of commerce in Canada throughout the duration of the offence, and is subject to adjustment based on aggravating or mitigating factors. If the Bureau's recommendation is accepted by the PPSC (and the accused), the prosecutor then submits that proposed fine jointly with the accused to the Court.

The determination of the sentence to be imposed is at the sole discretion of the Court, and a judge is not bound by a joint sentencing submission. Nevertheless, the Canadian jurisprudence has generally taken the view that a judge will depart from a joint sentencing submission only where accepting the submission would (1) be contrary to the public interest, or (2) bring the administration of justice into disrepute. This has been seen as a high threshold and is intended to foster confidence that the joint sentencing submission will be accepted by a sentencing judge. To date, the practice for Competition Act leniency matters has been for agreed statements of fact and joint sentencing submissions to be relatively short and not particularly detailed.

The Maxzone Case

Following an international investigation, in May 2012 Maxzone Auto Parts (Canada) Corp., the Canadian subsidiary of a Taiwan-based international automotive parts company, pleaded guilty under section 46 of the Competition Act to implementing directives to give effect to a foreign conspiracy to fix the sale prices of aftermarket replacement automotive lighting parts between January 2004 and September 2008. Maxzone Canada's U.S. affiliate pleaded guilty to similar charges in the United States in November 2011, for which it was ordered to pay a fine of U.S.$43 million. In addition, two senior executives of foreign affiliates of Maxzone Canada had pleaded guilty and were sentenced to serve 180 days and nine months, respectively, in a U.S. prison.

Maxzone Canada cooperated with the investigation of the Competition Bureau pursuant to the Bureau's Leniency Program. The joint sentencing submission proposed a $1.5 million fine to reflect approximately 10% of Maxzone Canada's relevant volume of commerce during the period of the offence - a 50% reduction of the 20% starting point.

Although Crampton C.J. accepted the jointly recommended $1.5 million sentence in accordance with past practice, he specifically stated that his reasons were meant to "alter future expectations" with respect to the information that a judge needs to assess a joint sentencing submission. He stated that, in the future, "the Court may very well require a more fulsome evidentiary record, or a modified approach to the determination of a jointly recommended sentence, as well as more detailed submissions, to become satisfied that such a sentence would not be contrary to the public interest and would not bring the administration of justice into disrepute".

The Chief Justice stated that the Court needs sufficient evidence and submissions to assess the application of the sentencing principles, as set forth in section 718 of the Criminal Code and by jurisprudence, in light of the public interest and administration of justice criteria. He identified four relevant sentencing factors for the sentencing judge to consider:

i. the fundamental purpose and objectives of sentencing, namely, "denunciation, general and specific deterrence, separation of offenders, rehabilitation, reparation to victims, and promoting a sense of responsibility in offenders and acknowledgement of the harm done to victims and to the community";

ii. the proportionality of the sentence with respect to the gravity of the offence;

iii. aggravating and mitigating factors; and

iv. other principles, including any advantage realized by the organization as a result of the offence, the degree of planning involved in carrying out the offence and its duration and complexity, and any restitution the organization has paid to the victims of the offence.

The Chief Justice noted that the brief joint sentencing submissions in the Maxzone case did not fully address some of the listed factors, and stated that "the Court will expect more in the future". He also raised concerns about the "arithmetical manner that was followed in this case" to arrive at the proposed fine. Specifically, the reasons suggest that future sentencing submissions should explain why a fine alone (i.e., without an accompanying prison sentence for representatives of the accused entity) would suffice to achieve general and specific deterrence. Crampton C.J. also called for the submissions to provide at least either a "ballpark" sense of the illegal gains contemplated by and ultimately derived from the conduct, or evidence that the accused has paid restitution to the ultimate victims. He also noted that the Court "requires a good sense of any relevant aggravating and mitigating factors and how they influenced the jointly recommended fine".


Quite apart from the discussion of evidentiary expectations reviewed in the reasons, the case raises a number of practical issues, not the least of which is the desire for disclosure of sentencing intentions relative to parties, such as individuals, who may not be before the court when the plea agreement is considered. It remains to be seen whether Crampton C.J.'s reasons in the Maxzone case will be adopted and implemented in subsequent proceedings, particularly in Provincial criminal Courts which routinely deal with a wide range of criminal pleas, or affect the Bureau's and the PPSC's approach to the Leniency Program. In the meantime, entities considering use of the Bureau's Leniency Program should carefully consider the implications for them of the uncertainties created by the reasons in the Maxzone case.

The full reasons can be found at: R. v. Maxzone Auto Parts (Canada) Corp., 2012 FC 1117, online:

Davies represents both individuals and corporations in criminal antitrust investigations and prosecutions, as well as follow-on class action proceedings. We have been involved in the majority of the most significant and complex cartel cases in Canada. The depth of our experience enables us to either successfully negotiate immunity or leniency for our clients and their employees, including those initially targeted for prosecution in Competition Bureau investigations, or contested proceedings, as appropriate.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Mark C. Katz
In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.