C-65.1 - Act respecting contracting by public bodies

Section 21.28 Disposition versions

2022-06-02

21.28. For the purposes of section 21.27, the integrity of an enterprise and that of its directors, partners, officers and shareholders as well as that of other persons or entities that have direct or indirect legal or de facto control over the enterprise may be examined.

To that end, the Authority may consider such factors as

(0.1)  whether the enterprise, one of its shareholders other than the natural person who is the majority shareholder, one of its partners or another person or entity that has direct or indirect legal or de facto control over it has, in the preceding five years, been found guilty of an offence listed in Schedule I;

(0.2)  whether the enterprise has, in the preceding five years, been found guilty by a foreign court of an offence which, if committed in Canada, could have resulted in criminal or penal proceedings for an offence listed in Schedule I;

(0.2.1)  whether the enterprise has, in the preceding five years, been the subject of an order of the Minister of Sustainable Development, Environment and Parks under an Act under that minister’s administration;

(0.3)  whether the enterprise has, in the preceding two years, been ordered to suspend work by a decision enforceable under section 7.8 of the Act respecting labour relations, vocational training and workforce management in the construction industry (chapter R-20);

(0.4)  whether the enterprise has, in the preceding two years, been ordered by a final judgment to pay an amount claimed under subparagraph c.2 of the first paragraph of section 81 of that Act;

(1)  whether the enterprise or a person or entity referred to in the first paragraph maintains or has maintained, in the preceding five years, connections with a criminal organization within the meaning of subsection 1 of section 467.1 of the Criminal Code (R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46) or with any other person or entity that engages in laundering of proceeds of crime or in trafficking in a substance included in any of Schedules I to IV to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (S.C. 1996, c. 19);

(2)  whether the enterprise or a person or entity referred to in the first paragraph has been prosecuted, in the preceding five years, for any of the offences listed in Schedule I;

(3)  whether an enterprise, any of its directors, partners, officers or shareholders or a person or entity that has direct or indirect legal or de facto control over the enterprise has direct or indirect legal or de facto control over the enterprise seeking or holding an authorization and was, at the time an offence listed in Schedule I was committed by another enterprise, a director, partner, officer or shareholder of that other enterprise or a person or entity that had direct or indirect legal or de facto control over that other enterprise, provided the other enterprise was found guilty of the offence in the preceding five years;

(4)  whether the enterprise is under the direct or indirect legal or de facto control of another enterprise that has, in the preceding five years, been found guilty of an offence listed in Schedule I or whether any of the directors, partners or officers of that other enterprise or a person or entity that had direct or indirect legal or de facto control over that other enterprise was under such control at the time the offence was committed;

(5)  whether the enterprise or a person or entity referred to in the first paragraph has, in the preceding five years, been found guilty of or prosecuted for any other criminal or penal offence committed in the course of the enterprise’s business;

(6)  whether the enterprise or a person or entity referred to in the first paragraph has repeatedly evaded or attempted to evade compliance with the law in the course of the enterprise’s business;

(7)  whether a reasonable person would conclude that the enterprise is the extension of another enterprise that would be unable to obtain an authorization;

(8)  whether a reasonable person would conclude that the enterprise is lending its name to another enterprise that would be unable to obtain an authorization;

(9)  whether the enterprise’s activities are incommensurate with its legal sources of financing; and

(10)  whether the enterprise’s structure enables it to evade the application of this Act.

For the purposes of section 21.27, the Authority may also consider whether a person in authority acting on behalf of the enterprise has, in the preceding five years, been found guilty of or prosecuted for an offence listed in Schedule I.

A finding of guilty must be disregarded if a pardon has been obtained. The facts and circumstances surrounding an offence for which a pardon has been obtained may nevertheless be taken into consideration.

For an enterprise that is a public corporation, a person holding 10% or more of the voting rights attached to the shares of the enterprise is a shareholder.

For the purposes of this section, legal or de facto control over an enterprise may be established, among other ways, on the basis of participation in the concerted exercise of rights within the enterprise or of powers over the enterprise; each of the participants in the exercise is then presumed to be the holder of control even though none of them would alone be the holder of control. It is presumed that the exercise is concerted if family ties exist between the participants. Furthermore, participation in a concerted exercise is presumed between spouses; each spouse is then presumed to be the holder of control even though only one of them exercises it.

2012, c. 25, s. 10; 2015, c. 6, s. 32; 2017, c. 27, s. 122; 2022, c. 18, s. 27.

2017-12-01

21.28. For the purposes of section 21.27, the integrity of an enterprise and that of its directors, partners, officers and shareholders as well as that of other persons or entities that have direct or indirect legal or de facto control over the enterprise may be examined.

To that end, the Authority may consider such factors as

(0.1)  whether the enterprise, one of its shareholders not referred to in subparagraph 2 of the firs paragraph of section 21.26, one of its associates or another person or entity that has direct or indirect legal or de facto control over it has, in the preceding five years, been found guilty of an offence listed in Schedule I;

(0.2)  whether the enterprise has, in the preceding five years, been found guilty by a foreign court of an offence which, if committed in Canada, could have resulted in criminal or penal proceedings for an offence listed in Schedule I;

(0.3)  whether the enterprise has, in the preceding two years, been ordered to suspend work by a decision enforceable under section 7.8 of the Act respecting labour relations, vocational training and workforce management in the construction industry (chapter R-20);

(0.4)  whether the enterprise has, in the preceding two years, been ordered by a final judgment to pay an amount claimed under subparagraph c.2 of the first paragraph of section 81 of that Act;

(1)  whether the enterprise or a person or entity referred to in the first paragraph maintains connections with a criminal organization within the meaning of subsection 1 of section 467.1 of the Criminal Code (R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46) or with any other person or entity that engages in laundering of proceeds of crime or in trafficking in a substance included in any of Schedules I to IV to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (S.C. 1996, c. 19);

(2)  whether the enterprise or a person or entity referred to in the first paragraph has been prosecuted, in the preceding five years, for any of the offences listed in Schedule I;

(3)  whether an enterprise, any of its directors, partners, officers or shareholders or a person or entity that has direct or indirect legal or de facto control over the enterprise has direct or indirect legal or de facto control over the enterprise seeking or holding an authorization and was, at the time an offence listed in Schedule I was committed by another enterprise, a director, partner, officer or shareholder of that other enterprise or a person or entity that had direct or indirect legal or de facto control over that other enterprise, provided the other enterprise was found guilty of the offence in the preceding five years;

(4)  whether the enterprise is under the direct or indirect legal or de facto control of another enterprise that has, in the preceding five years, been found guilty of an offence listed in Schedule I or whether any of the directors, partners or officers of that other enterprise or a person or entity that had direct or indirect legal or de facto control over that other enterprise was under such control at the time the offence was committed;

(5)  whether the enterprise or a person or entity referred to in the first paragraph has, in the preceding five years, been found guilty of or prosecuted for any other criminal or penal offence committed in the course of the enterprise’s business;

(6)  whether the enterprise or a person or entity referred to in the first paragraph has repeatedly evaded or attempted to evade compliance with the law in the course of the enterprise’s business;

(7)  whether a reasonable person would conclude that the enterprise is the extension of another enterprise that would be unable to obtain an authorization;

(8)  whether a reasonable person would conclude that the enterprise is lending its name to another enterprise that would be unable to obtain an authorization;

(9)  whether the enterprise’s activities are incommensurate with its legal sources of financing; and

(10)  whether the enterprise’s structure enables it to evade the application of this Act.

For the purposes of section 21.27, the Authority may also consider whether a person in authority acting on behalf of the enterprise has, in the preceding five years, been found guilty of or prosecuted for an offence listed in Schedule I.

A finding of guilty must be disregarded if a pardon has been obtained. The facts and circumstances surrounding an offence for which a pardon has been obtained may nevertheless be taken into consideration.

For an enterprise that is a public corporation, a person holding 10% or more of the voting rights attached to the shares of the enterprise is a shareholder.

2012, c. 25, s. 10; 2015, c. 6, s. 32; 2017, c. 27, s. 122.

2015-04-01

21.28. For the purposes of section 21.27, the integrity of an enterprise and that of its directors, partners, officers and shareholders as well as that of other persons or entities that have direct or indirect legal or de facto control over the enterprise may be examined.

To that end, the Authority may consider such factors as

(0.1)  whether the enterprise has, in the preceding five years, been found guilty of an offence listed in Schedule I;

(0.2)  whether the enterprise has, in the preceding five years, been found guilty by a foreign court of an offence which, if committed in Canada, could have resulted in criminal or penal proceedings for an offence listed in Schedule I;

(0.3)  whether the enterprise has, in the preceding two years, been ordered to suspend work by a decision enforceable under section 7.8 of the Act respecting labour relations, vocational training and workforce management in the construction industry (chapter R-20);

(0.4)  whether the enterprise has, in the preceding two years, been ordered by a final judgment to pay an amount claimed under subparagraph c.2 of the first paragraph of section 81 of that Act;

(1)  whether the enterprise or a person or entity referred to in the first paragraph maintains connections with a criminal organization within the meaning of subsection 1 of section 467.1 of the Criminal Code (R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46) or with any other person or entity that engages in laundering of proceeds of crime or in trafficking in a substance included in any of Schedules I to IV to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (S.C. 1996, c. 19);

(2)  whether the enterprise or a person or entity referred to in the first paragraph has been prosecuted, in the preceding five years, for any of the offences listed in Schedule I;

(3)  whether an enterprise, any of its directors, partners, officers or shareholders or a person or entity that has direct or indirect legal or de facto control over the enterprise has direct or indirect legal or de facto control over the enterprise seeking or holding an authorization and was, at the time an offence listed in Schedule I was committed by another enterprise, a director, partner, officer or shareholder of that other enterprise or a person or entity that had direct or indirect legal or de facto control over that other enterprise, provided the other enterprise was found guilty of the offence in the preceding five years;

(4)  whether the enterprise is under the direct or indirect legal or de facto control of another enterprise that has, in the preceding five years, been found guilty of an offence listed in Schedule I or whether any of the directors, partners or officers of that other enterprise or a person or entity that had direct or indirect legal or de facto control over that other enterprise was under such control at the time the offence was committed;

(5)  whether the enterprise or a person or entity referred to in the first paragraph has, in the preceding five years, been found guilty of or prosecuted for any other criminal or penal offence committed in the course of the enterprise’s business;

(6)  whether the enterprise or a person or entity referred to in the first paragraph has repeatedly evaded or attempted to evade compliance with the law in the course of the enterprise’s business;

(7)  whether a reasonable person would conclude that the enterprise is the extension of another enterprise that would be unable to obtain an authorization;

(8)  whether a reasonable person would conclude that the enterprise is lending its name to another enterprise that would be unable to obtain an authorization;

(9)  whether the enterprise’s activities are incommensurate with its legal sources of financing; and

(10)  whether the enterprise’s structure enables it to evade the application of this Act.

For the purposes of section 21.27, the Authority may also consider whether a person in authority acting on behalf of the enterprise has, in the preceding five years, been found guilty of or prosecuted for an offence listed in Schedule I.

A finding of guilty must be disregarded if a pardon has been obtained. The facts and circumstances surrounding an offence for which a pardon has been obtained may nevertheless be taken into consideration.

For an enterprise that is a public corporation, a person holding 10% or more of the voting rights attached to the shares of the enterprise is a shareholder.

2012, c. 25, s. 10; 2015, c. 6, s. 32.

2012-12-07

21.28. For the purposes of section 21.27, the integrity of an enterprise and that of its directors, partners, officers and shareholders as well as that of other persons or entities that have direct or indirect legal or de facto control over the enterprise may be examined.

To that end, the Authority may consider such factors as

(1)  whether the enterprise or a person or entity referred to in the first paragraph maintains connections with a criminal organization within the meaning of subsection 1 of section 467.1 of the Criminal Code (R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46) or with any other person or entity that engages in laundering of proceeds of crime or in trafficking in a substance included in any of Schedules I to IV to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (S.C. 1996, c. 19);

(2)  whether the enterprise or a person or entity referred to in the first paragraph has been prosecuted, in the preceding five years, for any of the offences listed in Schedule I;

(3)  whether an enterprise, any of its directors, partners, officers or shareholders or a person or entity that has direct or indirect legal or de facto control over the enterprise has direct or indirect legal or de facto control over the enterprise seeking or holding an authorization and was, at the time an offence listed in Schedule I was committed by another enterprise, a director, partner, officer or shareholder of that other enterprise or a person or entity that had direct or indirect legal or de facto control over that other enterprise, provided the other enterprise was found guilty of the offence in the preceding five years;

(4)  whether the enterprise is under the direct or indirect legal or de facto control of another enterprise that has, in the preceding five years, been found guilty of an offence listed in Schedule I or whether any of the directors, partners or officers of that other enterprise or a person or entity that had direct or indirect legal or de facto control over that other enterprise was under such control at the time the offence was committed;

(5)  whether the enterprise or a person or entity referred to in the first paragraph has, in the preceding five years, been found guilty of or prosecuted for any other criminal or penal offence committed in the course of the enterprise’s business;

(6)  whether the enterprise or a person or entity referred to in the first paragraph has repeatedly evaded or attempted to evade compliance with the law in the course of the enterprise’s business;

(7)  whether a reasonable person would conclude that the enterprise is the extension of another enterprise that would be unable to obtain an authorization;

(8)  whether a reasonable person would conclude that the enterprise is lending its name to another enterprise that would be unable to obtain an authorization;

(9)  whether the enterprise’s activities are incommensurate with its legal sources of financing; and

(10)  whether the enterprise’s structure enables it to evade the application of this Act.

For the purposes of section 21.27, the Authority may also consider whether a person in authority acting on behalf of the enterprise has, in the preceding five years, been found guilty of or prosecuted for an offence listed in Schedule I.

A finding of guilty must be disregarded if a pardon has been obtained. The facts and circumstances surrounding an offence for which a pardon has been obtained may nevertheless be taken into consideration.

For an enterprise that is a public corporation, a person holding 10% or more of the voting rights attached to the shares of the enterprise is a shareholder.

2012, c. 25, s. 10.