Federal Court Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

Date: 20050302

Docket: T-276-05

Citation: 2005 FC 316

BETWEEN:

                                                    HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

                                                                                                                                                           

                                                                           and

                                                              ROBERT J. HART

                                                                                                                                              Accused

                                                     REASONS FOR SENTENCE

SNIDER J.

[1]                The accused Mr. Robert J. Hart has pleaded guilty to one count of an indictable offence of breaching paragraph 45(1)(c) of the Competition Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-34, as amended (the Act).

[2]                Pursuant to a plea of guilty and the agreed statement of facts, there will be a conviction registered. It is necessary to sentence to accused.

[3]                Counsel for the parties presented an agreed statement of facts which was supplemented by oral submissions. They have suggested a fine of $50,000.

[4]                On a conviction under section 45, the penalty provided is imprisonment for a term up to five years or a fine not exceeding $10,000,000 or to both. The sentence under the Act should protect the public interest in free competition and should serve as a general and specific deterrent.

[5]                The Court relies on the following factors in deciding upon the sentence in this matter:

1.          In this case, the relevant section is section 45, the conspiracy section, and it is at the core of the criminal portion of the Act.

2.          The role of the accused is a factor. In this case, the accused was one of the directing minds of the corporate conspirators. Further, he was a conscious and voluntary participant in the conspiracy over a period of approximately five years.

3.          The volume of commerce affected must be considered. In this case, the volume of commerce of high-power graphite electrodes affected by anti-competitive activities of the accused and others in the Canadian market was at least $400 million during the relevant periods.


4.          Pursuant to subsection 734(2) of the Criminal Code, the Court must be satisfied with the accused's ability to pay the fine. As the fine is jointly proposed, the Court is satisfied of the accused's ability to pay.

[6]                The mitigating factors are:

1.          The accused has pleaded guilty to the offence and has saved the costs of further investigation and trial.

2.          The accused has agreed to attorn to the jurisdiction of Canadian Courts, thereby avoiding extradition proceedings.

3.          The accused has waived any jurisdictional objections he might have raised.

[7]                Finally, the Court notes that the accused's superior was fined $ 70,000 for similar activities.

[8]                Relying on these principles and factors and considering all of the evidence, the Act and the submissions of counsel, in the Court's view, the amount of the fine suggested by counsel is reasonable. The Court fines the accused $50,000 payable forthwith.

[9]                The Court will endorse the indictment as follows:


Plea of guilty accepted and conviction entered. The accused is ordered to pay a fine in the amount of $50,000 forthwith.

"Judith A. Snider"

                                                                                                                                                   J.F.C.                       


FEDERAL COURT

NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET:                                                        T-276-05

STYLE OF CAUSE:                                         HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

and

ROBERT J. HART

Accused

PLACE OF HEARING:                                    TORONTO, ONTARIO

DATE OF HEARING:                          MARCH 2, 2005

REASONS FOR SENTENCE BY:                  SNIDER J.

DATED:                                                            MARCH 2, 2005

APPEARANCES BY:                      

Lorne Ptack, Bradley Reitz                                FOR THE CROWN

David Kent                                                        FOR THE ACCUSED

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:                                                                                                                                      

David Kent

Toronto, Ontario                                               FOR THE ACCUSED

John H. Sims, Q.C.                                                      

Deputy Attorney General of Canada                  FOR THE CROWN           

                                                  

                                                                                               

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.