Canada v. Maxzone Auto Parts (Canada) Corp.

Canada v. Maxzone Auto Parts (Canada) Corp.

The court accepted the joint recommendation and imposed a $1.5 million fine but held that a jointly recommended fine premised essentially on an arithmetic percentage of an accused's volume of commerce, without a fulsome evidentiary record (including ballpark illegal gains or restitution and clear treatment of aggravating/mitigating factors), is insufficient to satisfy the court that acceptance is not contrary to the public interest or likely to bring the administration of justice into disrepute; going forward courts will expect more detailed evidence and submissions supporting such calculations and explanations why no imprisonment is sought for individuals where appropriate.

Citation
2012 FC 1117
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Maxzone Auto Parts (Canada) Corp.
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
24 September 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Competition Act (s.46) / Sentencing
Outcome
Maxzone Canada convicted on plea; sentenced to pay a fine of $1,500,000
Legal Topics
Price Fixing, Leniency Program, Joint Sentencing Submission, Denunciation and Deterrence
Source Language
English
Competition Law Criminal Law Sentencing Price Fixing Leniency Program Joint Sentencing Submission Denunciation and Deterrence

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Maxzone Auto Parts (Canada) Corp.

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Competition Act (s.46) / Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should accept a jointly recommended sentence
  2. 2 Adequacy of evidentiary record to support a fine calculated as a percentage of volume of commerce
  3. 3 Proper application of the Competition Bureau Leniency Program in sentencing

Ratio Decidendi

The court accepted the joint recommendation and imposed a $1.5 million fine but held that a jointly recommended fine premised essentially on an arithmetic percentage of an accused's volume of commerce, without a fulsome evidentiary record (including ballpark illegal gains or restitution and clear treatment of aggravating/mitigating factors), is insufficient to satisfy the court that acceptance is not contrary to the public interest or likely to bring the administration of justice into disrepute; going forward courts will expect more detailed evidence and submissions supporting such calculations and explanations why no imprisonment is sought for individuals where appropriate.

Court Disposition

Maxzone Canada convicted on plea; sentenced to pay a fine of $1,500,000

Orders

  • Fine of $1,500,000 imposed on Maxzone Auto Parts (Canada) Corp.
  • Conviction recorded following guilty plea to one count under s.46 of the Competition Act