Canada: "Commissioner of Competition v. Canada Pipe Company Ltd.": New Life for the Abuse of Dominance Provisions of the Competition Act

Last Updated: November 10 2006
Article by Mark A.A. Warner

The Federal Court of Appeal (the "Court") discussed the appropriate standards for identifying exclusionary conduct and evaluating the conduct of dominant firms on June 23, 2006. The Court issued its decision in Commissioner of Competition v. Canada Pipe Company Ltd. to set aside the decision of the Competition Tribunal on the basis that it had applied the incorrect legal tests for determining what constitutes an "anticompetitive act" and a "substantial lessening or prevention of competition" ("SLPC"). The Court also issued a decision regarding Canada Pipe's cross appeal on the proper market definition and market power. In a 2-1 decision, the Court dismissed Canada Pipe's cross-appeal.

In 2002, the Commissioner brought an application which alleged that the loyalty rebate program operated by Canada Pipe, referred to as the Stocking Distributor Program or "SDP", contravened the abuse of dominance and exclusive dealing provisions of Canada's Competition Act. On February 3, 2005, the Competition Tribunal found that Canada Pipe was dominant, but dismissed the Commissioner’s application on the basis that for a practice to be anti-competitive, "it must have a negative effect on competition. The Tribunal reasoned that the SDP was not an anti-competitive act because it did not impose significant switching costs on distributors, thus did not raise entry barriers, and in fact there was some evidence of entry and competition from imports in the record. To be guilty of abuse of dominance, a dominant firm must have engaged in a practice of anti-competitive acts and these acts must have resulted, or be likely to result, in a substantial prevention or lessening of competition in contravention of Section 79(1)(c) of the Competition Act.

Affect on Competition

The Court, agreed with the Commissioner that the Tribunal had erred by focusing its analysis on whether a substantial level of competition continued to exist in the market rather than whether competition would have been substantially greater in the absence of the SDP. The Court characterized the appropriate test as a "but for" test that asks whether "the relevant markets – in the past, present or future – [would] be substantially more competitive but for the impugned practice of anti-competitive acts". The Court held that the "but for" test is not the only correct approach, but nonetheless is one that must be at least considered in all cases.

The "but for" methodology will probably not lead to a different outcome by the Tribunal on remand as the Court restricted the Tribunal’s future analysis to "a redetermination in accordance with these reasons and on the basis of the evidence currently on record." It is doubtful that any sophisticated "but for" econometric evidence is currently on the record. This underscores another strange aspect of the case. The Tribunal finds support for the "but for" methodology in Concord Boat Corporation v. Brunswick Corporation, where the U.S. Court of Appeal for the Eighth Circuit emphasized the difficulty in operationalizing the "but for" test. Perhaps, of even more concern going forward is the explicit link between the "but for" test and the multi-faceted "purpose clause" of the Competition Act which contains elements that are not strictly focused on consumer welfare. Linking the Purpose Clause to the merger efficiencies trade-off analysis has led to some bizarre twists and turns in Canadian competition law, and one wonders what the proposed link between that clause and the "but for" analysis to exclusionary abuse cases will lead to.

In assessing whether competition has been, or is likely to be, prevented or lessened substantially, the Court suggested that an evaluation be made of "whether entry or expansion might be substantially faster, more frequent or more significant without the SDP; whether switching between products and suppliers might be substantially more frequent; whether prices might be substantially lower; and whether the quality of products might be substantially greater". Some have raised concerns that the Court has moved the SLPC test away from concerns with "market power" and effects on prices to consumers, and thus marks a turn towards European-style enforcement of abuse of dominance in the context of loyalty rebates. This concern is probably over-stated as it is axiomatic that market power in U.S. antitrust addresses both the power to control prices or to exclude competition, and ignores the recent tumult in various Circuit Courts of Appeal in the United States focusing on the exclusionary effects of loyalty rebates. The reason for that is that exclusion of competition can have an adverse effect on prices over time.

One odd aspect of the separate appeal and cross-appeal is reconciling Pelletier J.A.’s dissent in the cross-appeal suggesting that Canada Pipe did not have market power with his joining the majority with respect to the determination of the SLPC.

Anti-Competitive Acts

The Tribunal had determined that the SDP did not constitute an anti-competitive act primarily because it did not have a negative effect on competition. The Court held that the Tribunal had incorrectly required a causal link between the act and a decrease in competition. The Court repeatedly stressed that an anti-competitive act is identified by reference to its purpose and that the proper analysis in decideing whether an act is anti-competitive for Section 79(1)(b) only requires a finding that an act has an intended negative effect on "competitors", not on "competition". The Court stated that except for consideration in connection with the proffered business justification, evidence of the effect on the consumer "is largely irrelevant for the purposes" of determining whether there is an anti-competitive act. The Court held that a proffered business justification "is properly relevant only insofar as it is pertinent and probative in relation to the determination … as to whether the purpose for which the act was performed was a predatory, exclusionary or disciplinary negative effect on a competitor" and that "improved consumer welfare is on its own insufficient to establish a valid business justification".

The Court, indicated that to the extent that "efficiency" concerns are relevant to the abuse of dominance analysis, they are relevant in the context of Section 79(1)(b) such that "a business justification must be a credible efficiency or pro-competitive rationale for the conduct in question, attributable to the respondent, which relates to and counterbalances the anti-competitive effects and/or subjective intent of the acts." The Court did not mention Section 79(4) that requires the Tribunal to consider whether a practice arose as "a result of superior economic performance" when determining whether the practice would result in a SLPC. We should also point out that given that the Federal Court of Appeal and the Tribunal have tended to look at SLPC in a similar fashion under the various provisions of the Competition Act that have an SLPC requirement, we can't ignore the potential implications for the merger and other provisions.


The Court sent the case back to the Tribunal for a redetermination of the SLPC issue (and the issue of whether Canada Pipe had engaged in a practice of anti-competitive acts, as discussed below). Canada Pipe will be seeking leave to appeal to the Supreme Court, and it is expected that the leave application will be determined early next year. Given that the Court’s decision represents the first time that a court in Canada has considered the abuse of dominance provisions and the decision could have significant implications for other areas of competition law, this matter may be one which the Supreme Court will decide to hear.

Administrative Law Question

To some the most troubling aspect of the case relates to the deference owed by a reviewing court to a specialized administrative tribunal. This is the second time in the past 3 years that the Court has over-ruled the Tribunal on questions of law. The Tribunal was created as a specialized body to apply the expertise of lay members and judicial members on economic matters. However, the fundamental flaw of the Tribunal since it was introduced in 1986 is that too few reviewable practices are referred to it, and there are too few decided cases on substantive as opposed to procedural grounds. The Tribunal's supposedly expert "economic" analysis has clearly not kept pace with developments in the U.S. or the EU, and as a consequence, the Court has stepped into this vacuum, but not in a decisive way. So in Superior Propane - a merger to monopoly case - the Tribunal defied the Court, and the Court backed down. It will be interesting to see if the Tribunal on remand in Canada Pipe once again thumbs its nose at the Court, and if it does, how will the Court react this time. Early signs are not promising because it is very hard to see how a sophisticated econometric "but for" analysis can proceed if it was not in the record already before the Tribunal, which may suggest that the Court may need to reconsider its approach to instructing the Tribunal to act on remand.

Mark A. A. Warner is Counsel in the Antitrust/Competition & Marketing Group at Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP, and is a Member of the Bars of New York and Ontario. John Campion is Partner at Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP, and was Counsel to the Commissioner of Competition in the original Canada Pipe case before the Tribunal.

The content of this article does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied on in that way. Specific 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.

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.