Introduction

On 25 March 2026, the Competition Commission (the “Commission”) commenced proceedings in the Competition Tribunal against six undertakings and twelve individuals in relation to an alleged bid‑rigging syndicate in the building maintenance sector.

Background

In January 2024, the Commission received a referral from the Independent Commission Against Corruption (the “ICAC”) concerning a newly emerging syndicate suspected of corruption and anti‑competitive conduct in various building maintenance projects. The Commission subsequently conducted two joint operations with the ICAC in April and August 2024, uncovering key evidence that enabled it to bring the current proceedings and leading to the belief that the syndicate has now been neutralised.

The Commission alleges that, between April 2022 and September 2023, the bid-rigging syndicate participated in the tendering of building maintenance projects of at least 11 housing estates or buildings across eight districts in Hong Kong, with the total value of the relevant contracts estimated to be close to HK$700 million. The syndicate allegedly operated through a structured arrangement comprising a “mastermind” and several middlemen and contractors.

The Commission claims that, the mastermind first identified target building maintenance projects, and in each tender, the contractors were assigned either as the “main character” (the syndicate’s designated winner) or “helpers” (those responsible for submitting cover bids). The mastermind and middlemen then prepared and distributed detailed pricing instructions, referred to as “homework”, to the contractors, specifying the bidding prices down to exact figures so that the “main character” would submit the lowest bid within the syndicate. Internal communications cited in the case materials show the use of secret codes, discussions on how many “homework” bids were needed, and statements that the syndicate’s goal was not “to win cheap” but to inflate contract sums and to “corner 25% of Hong Kong’s building maintenance market through illicit means”.

On the Commission’s case, these arrangements amount to serious anti‑competitive conduct in the form of bid‑rigging, price‑fixing, market‑sharing and/or exchange of competitively sensitive information, in contravention of the First Conduct Rule under the Competition Ordinance (Chapter 619 of the Laws of Hong Kong) (the “Competition Ordinance”).

Legal proceedings

Relief sought before the Competition Tribunal

In the Tribunal proceedings, the Commission is seeking a declaration that the six undertakings and eleven of the individuals have contravened the First Conduct Rule. It also seeks pecuniary penalties against the undertakings and the relevant individuals, as well as director disqualification orders against six individuals.

Under the Competition Ordinance, the Tribunal may impose pecuniary penalties on undertakings of up to 10% of their annual Hong Kong turnover per contravention for a maximum period of three years, and may order individuals to pay pecuniary penalties or be disqualified from acting as company directors for up to five years.

Criminal enforcement and NCTCs

Additionally, certain individuals allegedly failed to comply with requests to provide information when the Commission exercised its compulsory powers during its investigation, and may therefore have committed criminal offences under sections 52 and 54 of the Competition Ordinance; these matters have been referred to the Hong Kong Police for criminal investigation.

Further, some contractors are said to have signed the Competition Commission’s model Non‑collusive Tendering Certificates (NCTCs) while engaging in the alleged bid‑rigging conduct. By making a false representation in the NCTCs, the relevant individuals may be liable for the criminal offence of conspiracy to defraud.

Conclusion

This case underscores the Commission’s continuing focus on cartels in procurement markets, particularly in the building maintenance sector, and its willingness to coordinate closely with the ICAC and other law‑enforcement agencies. For contractors, consultants and property managers, the case serves as a reminder of the significant civil and potential criminal exposure arising from bid‑rigging and the importance of providing appropriate training for staff involved in tendering.

For enquiries, please feel free to contact us at:

E: competition@onc.hk                                                      T: (852) 2810 1212 W: www.onc.hk                                                                    F: (852) 2804 6311 19th Floor, Three Exchange Square, 8 Connaught Place, Central, Hong Kong

Important: The law and procedure on this subject are very specialised and complicated. This article is just a very general outline for reference and cannot be relied upon as legal advice in any individual case. If any advice or assistance is needed, please contact our solicitors.

Published by ONC Lawyers © 2026