Canada: Private Enforcement And Litigation

Last Updated: February 16 2004

By John B. Laskin and Linda M. Plumpton

First published in The Antitrust Review of the Americas 2004.

Historically, private actions have played a very limited role in the enforcement of Canadian competition law. Their availability has been limited, and even where they have been available, they have not proved effective. However, recent changes suggest that private enforcement mechanisms may be developing more teeth. Companies doing business, or considering doing business, in Canada should take account of the risks associated with private actions.

The Competition Act

Most of the law regulating competition and antitrust matters in Canada is found in the federal Competition Act (‘the Act’). The purpose of the Act is to maintain and encourage competition and to promote the efficiency and adaptability of the Canadian economy. The Act seeks to achieve this purpose, in part, through the regulation of conduct that has or may have an adverse effect on consumer welfare and competition.

The Act divides anti-competitive conduct into two categories: criminal offences and civil or ‘reviewable’ matters.

Criminal offences prohibited under the Act include cartel activity (such as price-fixing and market allocation), bid-rigging and discriminatory or predatory pricing practices. These offences require proof on the criminal standard of beyond a reasonable doubt. A conviction under these provisions may lead to imprisonment or a substantial fine.

Civil or reviewable matters include mergers, conduct by market participants who have a dominant market position and certain trade practices, including refusal to deal, exclusive dealing, tied selling and market restriction. These matters involve conduct that may in some circumstances be anti-competitive, but in others may have a neutral or pro-competitive effect. Conduct falling within this category is subject to civil review by the Competition Tribunal (‘the Tribunal’), a specialised adjudicative body comprised of both judicial and lay members. Traditionally, only the Commissioner of Competition (the federal government official responsible for administering the Act) could bring reviewable matters before the Tribunal. However, recent amendments to the Act allow private litigants to seek leave to apply to the Tribunal for remedial orders in certain cases. With very limited exceptions, the only remedies currently available from the Tribunal are prohibition orders or other injunctive relief. It cannot award damages.

Private actions

Section 36 of the Act confers the private right of action. Under this section, any person who has suffered loss or damage as a result of a breach of one of the criminal provisions of the Act may sue for and recover damages equal to the actual loss suffered, plus the costs of investigating the misconduct and of bringing the proceeding. There is also a right of action under s. 36 for loss and damage resulting from a failure to comply with an order of a court or the Tribunal, including an order of the Tribunal prohibiting a reviewable practice.

The right of action in s. 36 has a relatively short limitation period. An action must be brought within two years from the later of the day on which the conduct was engaged in, the day on which any criminal proceedings are disposed of, or the day on which the breach of the court or Tribunal order occurred.

In contrast to the United States, a person suing under s. 36 may not claim treble damages. Section 36 also does not allow for recovery of punitive damages. Whether interlocutory or permanent injunctions are available in actions under s. 36 remains an open question, although some courts have found that injunctive relief is not available.

In an attempt to avoid these limitations, claimants commencing actions under s. 36 typically also include tort claims alleging, for example, common law conspiracy and unlawful interference with economic interests. These claims may extend the limitation period and the available remedies. They also permit claims for punitive damages.

A private litigant may establish liability under s. 36 whether or not the defendant company has been convicted of the criminal offence underlying the action. In most cases, however, a private action is brought only after a successful criminal prosecution for or a guilty plea to one of the offences described below, or an equivalent offence under another country’s antitrust laws. The conviction can be used in civil proceedings to establish commission of the offence.

Criminal offences

Some of the offences under the Act most frequently alleged in private actions are described below.

Conspiracy

Subject to limited exceptions, it is an offence under the Act to enter into a conspiracy, agreement or arrangement with another person to lessen competition unduly. The Act also specifically prohibits certain types of conspiracies relating to, for example, price, market allocation, and access to facilities. A conspiracy conviction may lead to imprisonment for up to five years, a fine of up to C$10 million, or both.

The Act contains a separate prohibition against the implementation by a corporation carrying on business in Canada of a foreign directive requiring it to give effect to a conspiracy entered into outside Canada. Even if no director or officer of the Canadian corporation had knowledge of the foreign-directed conspiracy, the corporation is guilty of an offence and subject to a fine in the discretion of the court.

Bid rigging

Bid rigging involves either (i) an agreement between or among two or more persons in which a person agrees not to submit a bid in response to a request for bids or tenders, or (ii) the submission of bids that are arrived at by agreement between or among two or more bidders. A conviction for bid-rigging may lead to imprisonment for up to five years or to a fine in the discretion of the court.

Price discrimination

The offence of price discrimination encompasses both classic price discrimination and predatory pricing practices. A seller may be convicted of price discrimination if the seller engages in sales that discriminate by providing an advantage to a purchaser not provided to the purchaser’s competitor in respect of sales of articles of like quality or quantity. It is also illegal to engage in a policy of selling products in any area of Canada at prices lower than those charged elsewhere in Canada, or to engage in a policy of selling products at unreasonably low prices, with the design or effect of substantially lessening competition or eliminating a competitor. A person convicted of price discrimination is liable to imprisonment for up to two years. There is no fine prescribed for this offence.

Price maintenance

It is a criminal offence for a person who produces or supplies a product to attempt to influence upward or to discourage the reduction of the price at which another person supplies, offers to supply or advertises the product in Canada. It is also an offence to refuse to supply a product or otherwise to discriminate against a person because of a low pricing policy. A conviction for price maintenance is punishable by a fine in the discretion of the court, imprisonment for up to five years, or both.

Misleading advertising

Misleading advertising is also a criminal offence under the Act. It is an offence to knowingly or recklessly make a representation to the public that is false or misleading in a material respect. The maximum penalty for misleading advertising is a fine in the discretion of the court, imprisonment for up to five years, or both. Recent amendments to the Act have moved other types of deceptive marketing practices to the civil regime.

Class proceedings

It is expensive and difficult for a claimant in a civil action to establish the commission of one of the offences in the Act. In the absence of a prior conviction in a criminal proceeding, courts will require a high degree of proof before finding that criminal conduct has taken place. For these reasons, actions brought under s. 36 of the Act were rare, and successful judgments even more so. With the advent of class proceedings in Canada, however, the volume of private actions has increased dramatically.

Class proceedings, or class actions, are now available by statute in many provinces (Ontario, British Columbia and Quebec among them) and in the Federal Court of Canada. The incentives created by the availability of contingency fees, and the possibility of much larger damage awards, have encouraged counsel and potential class members to pursue claims under s. 36 that otherwise would not have been brought. While there are undoubtedly substantially more actions being commenced under s. 36, class proceedings involve their own unique procedural hurdles.

Like other class proceedings, a class proceeding alleging a violation of Canadian competition law must satisfy the test for certifi- cation before a court will allow it to proceed to trial. The certification test in a Canadian class proceeding typically includes the following elements:

  • the claim must disclose a cause of action;
  • there must be an identifiable class of persons;
  • the claims must raise common issues;
  • a class proceeding must be the preferable procedure; and
  • there must be an appropriate representative plaintiff.

To date, only one antitrust class proceeding has been certified in Canada, and the decision to certify in that Ontario case was ultimately overturned on appeal. The case involved an alleged conspiracy to fix the price of iron oxide pigments used in the manufacture of bricks, paving stones and other building materials. A class composed entirely of indirect purchasers—homeowners—asserted that the alleged overcharge was passed on to them through a lengthy distribution chain.

The appeal court determined that s. 36 requires claimants to establish proof of loss as an essential component of liability. Liability could not be a common issue on the facts of the case. Each homeowner would be required to establish his or her loss independently. The complexities of proving the extent to which various participants in the distribution chain passed on the higher price caused by the alleged price-fixing conspiracy led the court to determine that a class proceeding was not the preferable procedure. The court left open the possibility that in another case where the evidence met the court’s concerns, claims by indirect purchasers could be pursued through a class action.

A lower court in Ontario recently applied similar reasoning in denying certification of a class proceeding alleging price maintenance. The action was brought on behalf of an estimated 20 million consumers who had allegedly overpaid for various audio-video products over a 20 year period. In refusing to certify, the court noted that the need for each plaintiff to prove actual loss or damage would require individual trials for each class member. As a result, even though the case raised a number of common issues, the more complex individual issues would make a class action unmanageable.

It remains uncertain whether consumers or other indirect purchasers will be able to use Canadian class proceedings to obtain relief for damage caused by price-fixing. In the United States, the law surrounding indirect purchaser class actions is more rigid. Indirect purchasers do not have standing to sue under federal antitrust legislation, although class actions may still be brought by indirect purchasers under some state antitrust statutes. For the time being, Canadian courts have declined to import these bright line rules.

With few cases decided concerning these issues, Canadian courts have yet to articulate clear principles setting out whether and when antitrust class actions will proceed past the certification stage. However, the continuing proliferation of class proceedings suggests that this uncertainty is not deterring potential plaintiffs.

Civil reviewable matters

The reviewable practices part of the Act deals with conduct that is potentially, but not inherently, anticompetitive. This conduct, which includes various trade practices, mergers, and abuses of dominant position, is subject to review by the Tribunal on application by the Commissioner of Competition, acting as prosecutor. The Tribunal may make a variety of remedial orders if it finds that reviewable conduct exists. For example, the Tribunal may issue a prohibition order or impose conditions on a merger that it believes would substantially lessen competition.

Private access to the Tribunal

Among the most significant recent changes to the Act was the creation of a private right of access to the Tribunal for certain civilly reviewable conduct. The Act now permits private parties to seek leave from the Tribunal to bring an application relating to refusal to deal, exclusive dealing, tied selling or market restriction. Applications for leave must be made within one year from the day on which the practice that is subject to the application has ceased.

The reviewable practices that may be the subject of an application for leave are described below.

Refusal to deal

If the Tribunal finds that there has been a refusal to supply a product and that:

  • a person is substantially affected in his business and cannot obtain adequate supply elsewhere in the market on usual trade terms due to insufficient competition among suppliers;
  • the person is willing and able to meet the usual trade terms of suppliers of the product;
  • the product is in ample supply; and
  • the refusal is having or is likely to have an adverse effect on competition in a market,

the Tribunal may order the supply of the product on usual trade terms.

Exclusive dealing and tied selling

Exclusive dealing refers to the practice of requiring, as a condition of supplying a product, that a customer deal only with the supplier, or refrain from dealing in certain products except as supplied by the supplier. Tied selling generally refers to the practice of requiring, as a condition of supplying a product, that a customer acquire another product from the supplier. These activities are subject to review by the Tribunal if:

  • the supplier is a major supplier of product in a market;
  • the activity is likely to impede entry or expansion of a firm in the market, to impede product introduction or expansion of sales in the market, or to have some other exclusionary effect; and
  • the activity is likely to lessen competition substantially.

If these criteria are established, the Tribunal may make a prohibition order or such other order as is necessary to restore or stimulate competition in relation to the product.

Market restriction

Market restriction is any practice of supplying a product to a customer on the condition that the customer restrict its sales to a defined market. If this practice is engaged in by a major supplier and is likely to substantially lessen competition, the Tribunal may make a prohibition order or such other order as is necessary to restore or stimulate competition.

The leave requirement

Before bringing an application, prospective private litigants must first obtain leave from the Tribunal. Leave will not be granted where a matter is already the subject of an inquiry by the Commissioner, was settled between the Commissioner and the person against whom the order is sought, or is already the subject of an application before the Tribunal.

In an application for leave, the applicant must file an affidavit setting out the supporting evidence. The Commissioner may also make written submissions on a leave application. The Tribunal may grant leave to make an application if it has ‘reason to believe’ that the applicant is directly and substantially affected in his or her business and the alleged practice could be subject to an order under one of the specified reviewable practices provisions.

There has to date been only one application for leave to the Tribunal. The Tribunal used the opportunity presented by this case to state more clearly the circumstances when it would grant leave. According to the Tribunal, the test for leave requires the Tribunal to determine:

whether the leave application is supported by sufficient credible evidence to give rise to a bona fide belief that the applicant may have been directly and substantially affected in the applicant’s business by a reviewable practice, and that the practices in question could be subject to an order.

This test imposes a high evidentiary burden. An order under the refusal to deal provision requires the applicant to establish that there has been or is likely to be an adverse effect on competition in the market. An order under the exclusive dealing, tied selling or market restriction provision requires a substantial lessening of competition. In most cases, meeting the leave test will require expert evidence.

Once leave is granted, the Commissioner may not make an application on the basis of the same or substantially the same facts as are alleged in the private proceeding. The Commissioner may intervene in any private proceeding, although he will likely only do so where the issues raised may have a significant impact on consumers, the business community, or the Canadian economy.

The limits of private access

Unlike the private right of action in s. 36, applications to the Tribunal do not permit the recovery of damages. The Tribunal is also empowered to award costs against an applicant, a power that may deter strategic or frivolous litigation.

As a result, the right to seek private access to the Tribunal is unlikely to be frequently exercised. Actions likely will be brought only where the conduct is easily detectable and the applicant has deep pockets to meet the stringent test for leave and high evidentiary burden. Applicants will likely be from industries where it will be easy to establish a direct and substantial impact on the business—for example, in markets that have few participants. Small and mediumsized enterprises may use private access to resolve local or limited private matters that the Commissioner of Competition would normally not take forward.

There is currently no mechanism under which a private litigant may bring a class proceeding before the Tribunal. Experience with s. 36 suggests that making class proceedings available might address some of the limitations of the right to seek private access.

Establishing anti-competitive conduct requires sophisticated expert evidence and experienced counsel. Individual actions tend to be brought under s. 36 only where the plaintiff has deep pockets and has suffered significant damage. Class proceedings make it more efficient for plaintiffs who have suffered minimal damage to seek remedies. They attract more sophisticated counsel through the availability of contingency fees. The possibility of large damage awards in class proceedings also creates an incentive to litigate. Even if applications could be made to the Tribunal on a class basis, damages would likely have to be available to create the necessary incentives.

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 Mondaq.com.

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

 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
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
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

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 or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq 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 of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions