Search

The merger review processes that Canada has developed since the enactment of the Competition Act in 1986 have succeeded in providing businesses and practitioners with more extensive guidance than can be found in any other jurisdiction, but there are still areas of competition policy that could be improved. Authorities could improve information request procedures, the timing of merger reviews and allocation of resources. Areas of substantive law that need clarification include ease of entry, efficiency gains and anticompetitive effects analysis.

The compliance approach to merger review adopted in Canada with the passage of the Competition Act in 1986 benefits businesses subject to review, antitrust enforcement agencies and the public. The compliance approach reduces costs for both businesses and the government and provides businesses with greater certainty. The confidential advice available to merging businesses provides greater certainty and an incentive to provide more information to regulatory bodies. Authorities reinforce the compliance approach with more adversarial processes for those who abuse the system.

Stricter price discrimination guidelines set forth under Canada's Competition Act have made Canada's price discrimination enforcement more consistent with US enforcement under the Robinson-Patman Act. Expansion of Canadian price discrimination law has allowed enforcement to reach volume discounts that are not related to the suppliers' cost savings. Canadian and US laws still differ in their treatment of conditional discounts, defenses, buyer liability and the necessity of a competitive injury. The differences between US and Canadian law will come under closer scrutiny with the future harmonization of trade regulation.