Skip to main content

The dispute hinges around data about the prices that homes have sold for in the recent past.

Deborah Baic/The Globe and Mail

The Federal Court of Appeal reserved its decision Wednesday after listening to arguments from both sides in the high-profile battle between the Competition Bureau and Canada's largest real estate board.

The Bureau has spent years trying to prove that the Toronto Real Estate Board, which represents more than 35,000 realtors and brokers, is engaged in anti-competitive practices. It had another shot to makes its point Wednesday, when it presented its case to the appeal court, after losing a lengthy hearing last year at the Competition Tribunal.

The case could impact the commissions that consumers pay to realtors, John Rook, a lawyer for the Commissioner of Competition, suggested to the appeal court.

Story continues below advertisement

The dispute hinges around data about the prices that homes have sold for in the recent past. The Competition Bureau wants the Toronto Real Estate Board to allow this data to become more freely available online.

Mr. Rook argued that information about the prices that homes in a given neighbourhood have fetched is critical to buyers and sellers. He said that the Toronto Real Estate Board, which owns and operates the Toronto area's Multiple Listing Service, has the most comprehensive, accurate, and up-to-date information about listings and prices.

He went on to imply that the real estate board restricted the use of its data because realtors were fearful that more online competition would lead to a reduction in the commissions that they charge. Technological advances could lower costs, attract more business, and ultimately reduce prices for consumers, he implied.

He said that commissions tend to be sticky, at around 2.5 per cent of the sale price for the selling agent and 2.5 per cent for the buying agent. Because commissions haven't changed much, realtors have been able to earn substantially more over the past five years thanks to rising home prices, he added.

The Competition Bureau estimates that realtors in the Greater Toronto Area earned $1.77-billion in commissions in 2007 and $2.2-billion in 2011. A one percentage point drop in commissions would save consumers in the city several hundred million dollars, Mr. Rook told the appeal court.

Much of his case relies on the meaning of section 79 of the Competition Act, which talks about a person or persons who have or are engaged in anti-competitive acts. Mr. Rook argued that the definition of a person in this instance includes trade associations, such as the Toronto Real Estate Board.

"TREB acts for the benefit of its members in the same way a parent company acts for the benefit of its subsidiary," he told the court. "TREB had market power by virtue of its control of the MLS."

Story continues below advertisement

But lawyers for the Toronto Real Estate Board argued that parliament could have more broadly defined person if that was what it intended.

TREB is a not-for-profit organization, and is not concerned with which realtors are winning or losing in the market, argued lawyer David Vaillancourt.

"A trade association cannot control this market," he said. "The economic benefit is derived by the members of TREB," not the board itself, he said.

In order to control a market, one has to be a competitor in that market, he argued.

TREB has previously said that privacy concerns are one of the main reasons it doesn't make data about the price that homes have sold for more widely available.

While the case focuses on the Toronto board, it is likely to have national implications.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Cannabis pro newsletter
To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies