SINGAPORE Law and Practice Contributed by: Azmul Haque, Ashley Chew, Hu Yutong and Aaron Leong, Collyer Law LLC
6.3 Cartels Section 34 Prohibition
Infringement Consequences Any provision of an agreement is void and unenforce - able to the extent that it infringes Section 34. Where an infringement of the Section 34 prohibi - tion is committed intentionally or negligently, CCCS may impose a financial penalty of up to 10% of the undertaking’s turnover in Singapore for each year of infringement, subject to a maximum of three years. A party that has suffered loss or damage directly as a result of an infringement may bring a civil claim for damages against the relevant undertaking. However, such private actions may only be commenced after CCCS has made a final infringement decision and any Unilateral conduct in Singapore is governed by the Section 47 prohibition under the Competition Act, which prohibits conduct by one or more undertak - ings that amounts to an abuse of a dominant position in a market in Singapore. Dominance is assessed by reference to market power rather than market share alone. The law does not prohibit dominance itself, but only its abuse. Scope of the Prohibition An undertaking is considered dominant if it has the ability to act independently of competitors, customers or suppliers. Abuse may take various forms, including: • predatory pricing; • exclusive dealing or tying arrangements; • refusal to supply; • margin squeeze; and • discriminatory pricing or conditions. The assessment is fact-specific and considers mar - ket definition, the degree of market power, barriers to entry, any objective or commercial justification, and overall competitive effects. appeal process has been exhausted. 6.4 Abuse of Dominant Position Section 47 Prohibition Singapore law does not recognise a standalone con - cept of “economic dependence”. However, conduct affecting dependent trading partners may still fall
Anti-competitive agreements and practices in Sin - gapore are governed by the Competition Act 2004, in particular the Section 34 prohibition. Section 34 prohibits agreements, decisions or concerted prac - tices that have as their object or effect the prevention, restriction or distortion of competition within Singa - pore. The prohibition is also enforced by CCCS. Scope of the Prohibition The Section 34 prohibition applies to a wide range of arrangements between undertakings, including hori - zontal agreements between competitors and informal arrangements and concerted practices, even where there is no formal contract. Common examples of anti-competitive conduct include: • price fixing; • market sharing; • output limitations between competitors; and • bid rigging. Certain forms of conduct (such as price fixing and bid rigging) are treated as hardcore restrictions and are likely to infringe the prohibition without the need for detailed analysis of actual effects. Exemptions The Competition Act provides for block exemptions and individual exemptions where an agreement gen - erates net economic benefits (eg, improvements in production or distribution), although these apply nar - Singapore adopts an effects-based approach to jurisdiction. The Section 34 prohibition applies where an agreement has the object or effect of restricting competition within Singapore, regardless of where the agreement was entered into or implemented. As such, arrangements entered into overseas may still fall within the scope of the law if they have an appreciable effect on competition in Singapore markets. rowly in practice. Territorial Scope
946 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook