With the world gradually adapting to the "new normal", competition authorities worldwide, including the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore ("CCCS"), are looking at cartel enforcement with renewed interest. It is therefore critical for businesses in Singapore to be alert to possible infringements under Singapore's competition laws and review their business practices accordingly.
In Singapore, Section 34 of the Competition Act 2004 prohibits agreements, decisions and practices that have the object or effect of preventing, restricting or distorting competition within Singapore ("section 34 prohibition"). This includes the prohibition of cartel activities, which are agreements between competitors that have the object of preventing, restricting or distorting competition, such as price-fixing, bid-rigging, market sharing agreements and agreements to limit output or control production/investment.
Here, we highlight key trends in CCCS's cartel enforcement with reference to case statistics.
- Financial penalty. CCCS has become increasingly aggressive in its imposition of penalties for anti-competitive conduct. In 2018, CCCS issued its two largest financial penalties to date – S$26.9 million (reduced to S$20.1 million upon appeal) and S$19.6 million, respectively.
- Appeal. To date, the Competition Appeal Board has reviewed appeals relating to seven CCCS infringement decisions involving the section 34 prohibition, most of which have only succeeded in reducing the amount of penalty payable.
- Leniency. CCCS has handled 33 leniency cases as of 31 March 2021 and has seen an increase in the number of leniency cases between FY2017 to FY2020. The leniency programme has led to the issuance of infringement decisions and the impositions of financial penalties in nine out of 16 section 34 infringement decisions.
- Fast Track Procedure. Since the inception of the Fast Track Procedure in 2016, there has only been one published case where the procedure was applied. In this case, two out of the three parties benefited from an additional 10% reduction in financial penalties as a result of their cooperation with CCCS under the Fast Track Procedure.
- Length of investigation. The length of investigations appears to have increased – the average duration of investigation for infringement decisions issued from 2016 to date was 45.6 months, compared to 25.4 months for infringement decisions issued before 2016.
- Scope of liability. The section 34 prohibition is extraterritorial in scope. CCCS has prosecuted three cartels involving foreign jurisdictions.
For more information, click here to read our Legal Update.
