The Toronto Sun has reported that the federal Competition Bureau has commenced an investigation into alleged price-fixing activities among concrete companies in the Greater Toronto Area home-building industry.
According to the Bureau, it is investigating businesses in the residential concrete forming industry in the Greater Toronto Area (companies that create basement foundations for residential homes). In addition to contractors, the allegations appear to include a trade association, the Residential Low Rise Forming Contractors Association of Metropolitan Toronto and Vicinity (the LRFA). Also according to Bureau officials, criminal searches have been conducted in the Toronto area.
Under section 45 of the Competition Act, three types of agreements between competitors are “per se” illegal (i.e., with no adverse competitive impacts required to be proven): (i) price-fixing agreements (agreements to fix, maintain, increase or control the price for the supply of a product or service), (ii) market allocation/division agreements (agreements to allocate sales, territories, customers or markets for the production or supply of a product) and (iii) output/supply restriction agreements (agreements to fix, maintain, control, prevent, lessen or eliminate the production or supply of a product). Other types of agreements between competitors are potentially subject to review under a second and separate non-criminal reviewable matters agreement provision (section 90.1).
The construction industry has long been a target of competition/antitrust regulators. For example, some of the construction related cases in Canada, many of which have also involved trade associations and have gone back about a century, have included building contractors, corrugated metal pipe manufacturers, electrical contractors, gypsum dealers and manufacturers, plumbing contractors, road surfacing contractors, chain link fence contractors, among others.
There have also been a number of recent criminal competition cases in Canada involving construction and construction supply related companies (see for example: Quebec Construction Companies Plead Guilty to Rigging Bids for the Chicoutimi Hospital, Guilty Plea and $425,000 Fine for Bid-rigging in Montreal, Charges Laid in Residential Construction Bid-rigging Scheme in Montreal, Competition Bureau Exposes Sewer Services Cartel in Quebec, Competition Bureau Obtains Court Order Against the Saskatchewan Roofing Contractors Association).
The potential penalties for violating the criminal conspiracy provisions of the Act include fines of up to $25 million (per count), imprisonment for up to 14 years, or both (increased in 2010 from the previous $10 million per count and 5 years imprisonment). Canadian courts may also issue “prohibition orders” ordering that conduct stop and that a party (or parties) take steps to avoid future offences and comply with the law.
Based on the potential risk, it is incumbent on trade and professional associations to take commonsense compliance steps – for example see: competition law compliance and trade associations and competition law.
____________________
For more information about our regulatory law services contact: contact
For more regulatory law updates follow us on Twitter: @CanadaAttorney