The CCS also advocates pro-competition policies within Government, providing advice to Ministries, Statutory Boards and other public bodies on request.  In addition, as part of its outreach activities and advocacy work, it explains the provisions of the Act to organizations, companies and other interested groups.

• relating to services of general economic interest; 
• necessary to comply with legal requirements or to avoid conflict with Singapore’s international obligations; 
• arising from exceptional or compelling reasons of public policy; 
• relating to vertical agreements; 
• goods and services regulated by other competition law;  
• mergers approved under any other law or competition codes; and
• agreements with net economic benefit (such agreements will only enjoy exclusion from the s.34 prohibition)

Specifically, the following activities are excluded: the supply of ordinary letter and postcard services; piped potable water; wastewater management services; scheduled bus services; rail services; cargo terminal operations; and clearing house activities by specified persons.

Both the CPFTA and Competition Act bring benefits to consumers, but in different ways.  With the Competition Act, consumers benefit from more choices, lower prices and better products and services when businesses compete on merit.   The CCS focuses on the market conduct of businesses, with the aim of promoting healthy competition.  The CPFTA protects consumers from misleading or deceptive tactics that some businesses use when consumers enter into transactions with them. Complaints relating to CPFTA issues should be sent to CASE.

1. CCS Guidelines on the Major Provisions
2. CCS Guidelines on the Section 34 Prohibition
3. CCS Guidelines on the Section 47 Prohibition
4. CCS Guidelines on the Substantive Assessment of Mergers
5. CCS Guidelines on Merger Procedures
6. CCS Guidelines on Market Definition
7. CCS Guidelines on the Powers of Investigation
8. CCS Guidelines on Enforcement
9. CCS Guidelines on Lenient Treatment for Undertakings Coming Forward with Information on Cartel Activity Cases
10. CCS Guidelines on Filing Notifications for Guidance or Decision with respect to the Section 34 Prohibition and Section 47 Prohibition 
11. CCS Guidelines on the Appropriate Amount of Penalty
12. CCS Guidelines on the Treatment of Intellectual Property Rights

Pagesetters Services Pte Ltd
Block 2 Pasir Panjang Road
#11-01 Alexandra Distripark
Singapore 118481

Tel: (65) 6270 6521
Fax: (65) 6273 3342
Email: info@pagesetters.com.sg 

A short introductory guide – the Practical Guide – which is designed for those needing a quick overview, is also available on the CCS website for browsing in both English and Chinese.

A market consists of both buyers and sellers of a product in a certain geographical area. Market definition identifies all the products on the demand side that buyers regard as reasonable substitutes for the product in question, and all the sellers (both current and potential) who may supply the product and its substitutes. The geographical reach of the market will also have to be considered and it may extend beyond the area in which the product in question is sold.

To define the product market, we first consider the product being investigated and consider the effect of a 10% increase in price above competitive levels. If a significant number of buyers switch to substitute products following the price increase, we will include the substitute products in the definition of the product market. The exercise is repeated and the market widened until the price increase does not lead to switching. That is the product market.

The geographic market can be defined using the same framework, but this time with the focus on the geographic areas where the substitution is taking place.

More information on defining the market can be found in the CCS Guidelines on Market Definition.

Price-fixing, bid-rigging, sharing markets and limiting or controlling production or investment will almost always infringe the Act as they are, by their very nature, regarded as restrictive of competition to an appreciable extent.

• in a case where the agreement is made between competing businesses, the aggregate market share of the parties to the agreement does not exceed 20% in any of the relevant markets affected by the agreement. 
• in a case where the agreement is made between non-competing businesses, the market share of each of the parties to the agreement does not exceed 25% in any of the relevant markets affected by the agreement.

However, it must be emphasized that these market share thresholds are indicative. There may be an appreciable adverse effect on competition even if the total market share of the businesses involved is below the indicated thresholds. Similarly, agreements between businesses with market shares above these thresholds do not necessarily have an appreciable effect on competition. What matters is not the numerical value of the share, but the ability to distort competition by exercising market power. Market power is usually correlated with market share, but this is not always the case.

More information can be found at the CCS Guidelines on the Section 34 Prohibition.

If SMEs are involved in agreements involving price-fixing, rigging of tender bids, market sharing or limitation of output, which are, by their very nature regarded as restrictive of competition to an appreciable extent, the onus is on the SMEs to demonstrate net economic benefit, so that their agreement will not be regarded as an infringement of the section 34 prohibition.

These could include cases where competitors agree to work together, for example, to produce or distribute a product or service or to conduct research, and the arrangement has the effect of improving production or distribution, or promoting technical or economic progress.

Such arrangements generate longer term efficiencies and productivity. As their economic benefits outweigh the negative effects of competitors coming together, these arrangements will not run foul of the Competition Act, if the terms of the arrangement are not unduly restrictive and there is no substantial limitation of competition.

1. The improvement of production or distribution; or
2. The promotion of technical or economic progress,

while not:

1. Imposing on the undertakings concerned restrictions not indispensable to the attainment of those objectives; or
2. Affording the undertakings concerned the possibility of eliminating competition in a substantial part of the goods or services in question.
   
   

The CCS will take into consideration the criteria listed in section 41 of the Act when it makes its recommendation. Before making its final recommendation, the CCS will publish details of its recommendation for consideration and consider any representations from interested parties regarding its proposed recommendation.

The Act is concerned with agreements, decisions by associations of undertakings or concerted practices, which have an appreciable adverse effect on competition in Singapore. Decisions by associations of undertakings, including trade or other associations, can fall within the ambit of the section 34 prohibition, if they have the object or effect of influencing the conduct or co-ordinating the activity of the members in some commercial matter. Decisions of an association can include its constitution, rules and recommendations. Resolutions passed in general meetings, binding decisions of the management or executive committee of the association, or rulings of its chief executive, are also considered ‘decisions’ of the association. Such decisions will generally fall within the scope of the section 34 prohibition, even if they are not binding on members, and may not have been fully complied with.

You may refer to Annex A of the CCS Guidelines on the Section 34 Prohibition for some examples of decisions, rules, recommendations or other activities of associations of undertakings that may, or may not, appreciably prevent, restrict or distort competition. This table can also be found in Annex A of the CCS Guideline On The Section 34 Prohibition.

Where the infringement by an association of undertakings relates to the activities of its members, the penalty shall not exceed 10 per cent of the sum of the turnover of business of each member of the association of undertakings in Singapore active on the market affected by the infringement, for each year of infringement, up to a maximum of 3 years.

1. predatory behaviour towards competitors;
2. limiting production, markets, or technical development to the prejudice of consumers;
3. applying dissimilar conditions to equivalent transactions with other trading parties, thereby placing them at a competitive disadvantage;
4. making the conclusion of contracts subject to acceptance by the other parties of supplementary obligations which, by their nature or according to commercial usage, have no connection with the subject of the contracts.

This list is not exhaustive and is for illustration only. It is not necessary for the dominant position, the abuse and the effect of the abuse to be in the same market. More detailed examples of conduct which may be considered to be an abuse of a dominant position are given in the CCS Guidelines on the Section 47 Prohibition .

(Please mark ‘COMPLAINT’ clearly on the top left hand corner of the envelope so that we may speed up the processing of your complaint.)

If you think any of the information you provide might seriously damage your commercial interests if it is disclosed, you should clearly mark it as confidential and explain why you think it should be treated as such. You should try to limit the amount of information to be regarded as confidential. The CCS does not accept blanket requests for confidentiality. If the CCS considers it necessary to reveal any of the confidential information you have provided, the CCS will discuss this with you.

If the complaint can be substantiated with the relevant information, the CCS will evaluate and assess whether the activity or conduct complained of is likely to have an appreciable adverse effect on competition.

If the complaint seems well-founded, and passes the initial investigation, the CCS may launch a formal investigation if there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that competition law has been breached. You may also be asked to provide further information. In deciding whether to launch a formal investigation, the CCS will also take into account its resources and other priorities.

1. production of any document which it considers relates to any matter relevant to the investigation,
2. explanation of any document produced; and
3. the whereabouts of any document if it is not produced.

Any failure to comply with the powers above may result in a criminal offence being committed under Section 75 – 78 of the Competition Act.

Leniency applicants who are not first in line to apply may be granted a reduction of up to only 50% if the amount of the financial penalty.  It is therefore in your interest to apply as soon as possible.

The CCS Guidelines on Lenient Treatment for Undertakings Coming Forward with Information on Cartel Activity Cases contains more information.

(Please mark ‘LENIENCY APPLICATION’ clearly on the top left hand corner of the envelope.)

You can also approach the CCS through a law firm, who can speak to the CCS on your behalf.

If you are still in doubt, you may wish to seek independent legal advice.

Alternatively, you may apply for a notification for guidance or decision to seek the CCS’ view on whether the agreement is likely to infringe or infringes the Act. You will have to provide the CCS with the relevant information required for us to properly assess your agreement. You will also be required to pay a fee according to the table below. The initial fee is always required, and the further fee may be charged depending on the complexity of the case. 
 

	Initial Fee Â	Further Fee
Notification for Guidance	S$3,000	S$20,000
Notification for Decision	S$5,000	S$40,000

 
If you apply for guidance as to whether the same activity infringes either the section 34 prohibition or the section 47 prohibition, you will have to pay two separate fees: one for the analysis under section 34 and another for the analysis under section 47.  This will bring the total initial fee payable to $6,000 (i.e. $3,000 plus $3,000).  However, you may use a single form for the application.

Likewise, if you apply for a decision as to whether the same activity infringes either the section 34 prohibition or the section 47 prohibition, you will also have to pay two separate fees: one for the analysis under section 34 and another for the analysis under section 47.  This will bring the total initial fee payable to $10,000 (i.e. $5,000 plus $5,000).  Similarly, you may use a single form for the application.

Please refer to the CCS Guidelines on Filing Notifications for Guidance or Decision with respect to the Section 34 Prohibition and Section 47 Prohibition for more information.

An undertaking which notifies an agreement is immune from financial penalties for infringements of the section 34 prohibition arising from that agreement during the period when the CCS is considering the matter. If the CCS finds an infringement, the undertaking will be given a short period to comply with the Act. This immunity from possible financial penalties does not apply to notifications in respect of conduct which may constitute an abuse of a dominant position.

Needless to say, there are no financial penalties if agreements or conduct are found not to breach the Act, or if they are found to be excluded or exempted from the Act.

1. it has reasonable grounds for believing that there has been a material change of circumstance since it gave its guidance;
2. it has reasonable grounds for suspecting that the information on which it based its guidance was incomplete, false or misleading in a material particular;
3. a complaint about the agreement or conduct has been made to the CCS (in the case of agreements, the complaint is to come from someone who is not a party to the agreement); or
4. (in the case of agreements) one of the parties to the agreement applies to the CCS for a decision in respect of the agreement, under section 44 of the Act.

In the case of decisions, once the CCS has issued a decision that there is no infringement, the CCS will take no further action in respect of the notified agreement or conduct, unless:

1. the CCS has reasonable grounds for believing that there has been a material change of circumstance since it gave its decision; or
2. the CCS has reasonable grounds for suspecting that the information on which it based its decision was incomplete, false or misleading in a material particular.

However, applications for decision are not afforded the same level of confidentiality as applications for guidance. In particular, once an application for decision is made, a summary of the application's details (provided by the applicant) will be entered into a public register.

Finally, the filing fee is higher for decisions than guidance (see below), reflecting the greater amount of effort required to determine the outcome.

	Initial FeeÂ	Further Fee
Notification for Guidance	S$3,000Â	S$20,000
Notification for Decision	S$5,000	S$40,000

	Initial FeeÂ	Further Fee
Notification for GuidanceÂ	S$3,000	S$20,000
Notification for Decision	S$5,000	S$40,000

If you apply for guidance as to whether the same activity infringes either the section 34 prohibition or the section 47 prohibition, you will have to pay two separate fees: one for the analysis under section 34 and another for the analysis under section 47.  This will bring the total initial fee payable to $6,000 (i.e. $3,000 plus $3,000).  However, you may use a single form for the application.

Likewise, if you apply for a decision as to whether the same activity infringes either the section 34 prohibition or the section 47 prohibition, you will also have to pay two separate fees: one for the analysis under section 34 and another for the analysis under section 47. This will bring the total initial fee payable to $10,000 (i.e. $5,000 plus $5,000).  Similarly, you may use a single form for the application.

Applications for guidance or decision are made by submitting Form 1 to the CCS, together with the initial fee.  Where requested by the CCS, the applicant must also submit Form 2. In cases where Form 2 is submitted, the CCS may, within 2 months of receiving Form 2, specify a time frame within which the applicant is to pay the CCS a further fee. This further fee will be levied in cases where the CCS is of the opinion that the case is a complex one requiring significant analysis. The applicant may choose not to pay the further fee, in which case the CCS may then determine the application by not giving guidance or a decision. 

There will be no refund of the fees paid if the information required by the CCS is not received by the prescribed deadline, but the CCS will be amenable to reasonable requests for extensions.

Application for Guidance/Decision
Competition Commission of Singapore
5 Maxwell Road,
Tower Block #13-01 MND Complex
Singapore 069110

The applicant is required to take all reasonable steps to notify all other parties to the agreement or conduct about the application. This notification can be given before the notification is filed with the CCS, and must, at the very latest, be given within 7 working days from the date of filing of the notification.

The CCS encourages businesses to self-assess their risk of infringing competition law before deciding on how best to ensure compliance. Businesses may find it useful to refer to our indicative check-list of behaviour as a starting point. If a business assesses that it runs a risk of infringing competition law, it may wish to seek professional advice on the appropriate measures to mitigate the risk.

• Active implementation

        A compliance programme goes further than a written or verbal 
        commitment to comply with the law. It should be actively implemented 
        and promoted through appropriate policies and procedures.

• Appropriate policies and procedures to ensure compliance with competition law

        For a compliance programme to work well, businesses should put in place 
        effective policies supported by appropriate procedures. An effective 
        policy could include seeking a written undertaking from employees and 
        directors to conduct their business dealings within the compliance 
        framework and taking disciplinary action against employees/directors 
        whose actions resulted in an infringement of the law. The relevant 
        procedures should give employees avenues to seek advice on whether a 
        particular transaction complies with competition law and report activities 
        that they suspect infringe the law.

        Staff should be educated on the business' policy and procedures on 
        compliance. One way of doing this would be to issue a compliance 
        manual/handbook detailing competition law and the business' compliance 
        procedures.

• Support and adherence of senior management

        The support and adherence of senior management should be visible, 
        active and regularly reinforced, as these are important indicators of a 
        business' commitment to comply with competition law. They not only 
        signal to external stakeholders that the business values compliance, but 
        also encourage junior employees within the organization to support the 
        compliance programme and actively follow its principles.

• Active and ongoing training for employees at all levels who may be involved in activities concerning competition law

        Training on competition law itself and on the business' policies and 
        procedures in relation to compliance should be conducted. The training 
        could be offered as part of the induction programme for new staff and on 
        a regular basis thereafter to reinforce the compliance message and keep 
        staff updated on any changes in business practices and the law. 
        Businesses should keep a record of any training given.

• Regular evaluation and review 

        Evaluation is essential as a means of ensuring that the compliance 
        programme is working properly, as well as to identify and address areas 
        of potential risk. Evaluation could take the form of testing individual 
        employees' knowledge of the law, policy and procedures. Adherence to 
        compliance policy could also be used as one of the criteria against which 
        an individual's and department's performance is appraised. The evaluation 
        process should be carried out as openly as possible to indicate to 
     Â