January 26, 2011
The U.K. Office of Fair Trading (OFT) has announced that it has launched an investigation into suspected cartel (conspiracy) activity among commercial vehicle manufacturers in the U.K. According to the OFT, the potential cartel may involve price-fixing, market sharing and/or other types of anti-competitive coordination between competing vehicle manufacturers under the Enterprise Act 2002 and the Competition Act 1998 (see: OFT Request for Information on Suspected Cartel Activity Involving Manufacturers of Commercial Vehicles). In connection with its investigation, the OFT is also requesting information that may be relevant to its investigation.
Like Canada, the OFT operates a Leniency Policy, under which a business may receive total or partial immunity from fines that the OFT could apply for violations of the U.K. Competition Act where they come forward with information. Also like Canada, the U.K. Leniency Program operates on a “first in” basis – i.e., full immunity is potentially available to the first member of a cartel to come forward with relevant information (and who meets other conditions). Unlike Canada, some jurisdictions, including the U.K. have extended the scope of their investigative leniency “tools” to include monetary rewards for information that assists with their investigations. In the current U.K. OFT investigation of U.K. commercial vehicle manufacturers, for example, the OFT states that such rewards under U.K. law can be as high as £100,000, depending on the particular circumstances.
In Canada, under the Competition Bureau’s Immunity Program, full immunity from prosecution may be available to a party (including its current directors, officers and employees) that is the first to approach the Bureau with evidence of an offence either unknown to the Bureau or that the Bureau is aware of but does not yet have sufficient evidence to refer the matter to the Director of Public Prosecutions for prosecution. (In Canada, while the Bureau has the jurisdiction to investigate alleged breaches of the Competition Act, the ultimate decision as to whether to commence a prosecution rests with the DPP.)
In addition, even where a company or other organization does not qualify for full immunity, it may still be possible to obtain partial immunity from penalties under the Bureau’s Leniency Program. Early detection of a potential violation of the Competition Act can, therefore, be extremely important to potentially mitigate liability under the Act.
____________________
SERVICES AND CONTACT
I am a Toronto competition and advertising lawyer offering business and individual clients efficient and strategic advice in relation to competition/antitrust, advertising, Internet and new media law and contest law. I also offer competition and regulatory law compliance, education and policy services to companies, trade and professional associations and government agencies.
My experience includes advising clients in Toronto, Canada and the US on the application of Canadian competition and regulatory laws and I have worked on hundreds of domestic and cross-border competition, advertising and marketing, promotional contest (sweepstakes), conspiracy (cartel), abuse of dominance, compliance, refusal to deal, pricing and distribution, Investment Canada Act and merger matters. For more information about my competition and advertising law services see: competition law services.
To contact me about a potential legal matter, see: contact
For more regulatory law updates follow me on Twitter: @CanadaAttorney
Templates/precedents and checklists to run promotional contests in Canada
Templates/precedents and checklists to comply with Canadian anti-spam law (CASL)
