Download PDF

South Africa Order

Competition Tribunal

African Rainbow Minerals Limited v The Machadodorp Works ferrochrome and ferromanganese division of Assmang (Pty) Ltd (LM232Jan19) [2019] ZACT 6 (20 February 2019)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The Tribunal found that the proposed transaction did not give rise to a horizontal overlap, as ARM and the Target Business are considered a single economic entity. The transaction would not alter the pre-merger structure or increase ARM's market share. The Commission's investigation confirmed that the merger was unlikely to substantially prevent or lessen competition in any relevant market. Furthermore, the merging parties confirmed that there would be no negative effects on employment and no other public interest concerns. Accordingly, the Tribunal approved the transaction unconditionally.

Court disposition

The proposed merger was approved unconditionally.

Orders

  • The proposed transaction between African Rainbow Minerals Limited and the Machadodorp Works ferrochrome and ferromanganese division of Assmang (Pty) Ltd is approved without conditions.

02

Material facts

Parties

African Rainbow Minerals Limited

Applicant Counsel: X Nyali

The Machadodorp Works ferrochrome and ferromanganese division of Assmang (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Merger Approval / Final Determination

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The applicant submitted that the acquisition would not alter the pre-merger structure, as ARM already exercises control over the Target Business through its joint control of Assmang. The transaction would not result in any increase in market share or change in competitive dynamics. The applicant further confirmed that there would be no negative impact on employment and no other public interest concerns.
Respondent
The Competition Commission argued that the transaction did not give rise to a horizontal overlap because ARM and the Target Business are considered a single economic entity. The Commission concluded that the merger would not substantially prevent or lessen competition and raised no public interest concerns, including employment effects.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Competition Act, No. 89 of 1998

    A merger will not be prohibited if it does not substantially prevent or lessen competition in any relevant market.

  2. 02

    Competition Act, No. 89 of 1998

    Public interest factors, including employment effects, must be considered in merger assessments.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The Tribunal found that the proposed transaction did not give rise to a horizontal overlap, as ARM and the Target Business are considered a single economic entity. The transaction would not alter the pre-merger structure or increase ARM's market share. The Commission's investigation confirmed that the merger was unlikely to substantially prevent or lessen competition in any relevant market. Furthermore, the merging parties confirmed that there would be no negative effects on employment and no other public interest concerns. Accordingly, the Tribunal approved the transaction unconditionally.

Obiter and limits

  • The Tribunal noted that the Target Business had ceased its production and smelting operations and was only active in the recovery of manganese from historical slag dumps.
  • The Tribunal acknowledged the merging parties' confirmation that the transaction would not negatively affect employment in South Africa.

Court disposition

The proposed merger was approved unconditionally.

  • The proposed transaction between African Rainbow Minerals Limited and the Machadodorp Works ferrochrome and ferromanganese division of Assmang (Pty) Ltd is approved without conditions.

Source and reliance status

Competition Tribunal

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

Competition Tribunal

Order

[2019] ZACT 6

COMPETITION

TRIBUNAL OF SOUTH AFRICA

Case No: LM232Jan19

In the matter between

African Rainbow Minerals Limited

Primary Acquiring Firm

And

The Machadodorp Works ferrochrome and

ferromanganese division of Assmang (Pty) Ltd Primary Target Firm

Panel

: Yasmin Carrim (Presiding Member)

: Mondo Mazwai (Tribunal Member)

: lmraan Valodia (Tribunal Member)

Heard on

: 6 February 2019

Order Issued on : 6 February 2019

Reasons Issued on : 20 February 2019

REASONS FOR DECISION

Approval

[1] On 6 February 2019, the Competition Tribunal ("Tribunal") unconditionally approved the proposed transaction involving African Rainbow Minerals Limited ("ARM") and the Machadodorp Works ferrochrome and ferromanganese division ("Target Business") of Assmang (Pty) Ltd ("Assmang"), hereinafter collectively referred to as the merging parties.

[2] The reasons for the approval of the proposed transaction follow.

Parties to the transaction

Primary Acquiring Firm

[3] ARM is a public entity listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange. ARM is ultimately controlled by Patrice Motsepe through various trusts. ARM directly and indirectly controls numerous firms including Assmang.

[4] ARM is a diversified mining and minerals holding company. ARM, through its subsidiaries and joint ventures, mines and beneficiates iron ore, manganese ore, chrome ore, platinum group metals,[1] copper, nickel and coal. ARM also produces manganese and chrome alloys.

Primary Target Firm

[5] The Target Business is a wholly-owned division of Assmang. Assmang is jointly controlled by ARM and Assore Limited.

[6] The Target Business used to be a vertically integrated ferrochrome and ferromanganese business active in the mining of chrome and manganese ore, the smelting of ferrochrome and ferromanganese, and the production and sale of chrome and manganese alloys into the international market. The Target Business has ceased its production and smelting operations. It is now only active in the recovery of manganese from historical slag dumps. The recovered manganese is used to produce low-grade ferrochrome fines and chips which are then sold to the stainless-steel market.

Proposed transaction and rationale

[7] ARM will acquire the Target Business through a sale of shares.[2] Post-merger, the Target Business will be housed directly under ARM and ARM will have sole control over the Target Business.

Impact on competition

[8] The Competition Commission ("Commission") found that the proposed transaction did not give rise to a horizontal overlap as ARM and the Target Business are considered a single economic entity.

[9] Given that the proposed transaction would not alter the pre-merger structure and that the market shares of ARM would not increase, the Commission concluded that the proposed transaction was unlikely to substantially prevent or lessen competition in any relevant market. We concurred with this conclusion.

Public interest

[10] The merging parties confirmed that the proposed transaction would not have any negative effects on employment in South Africa.[3] The proposed transaction raised no other public interest concerns.

Conclusion

[11] In light of the above, we approved the proposed transaction unconditionally.

Ms Yasmin Carrim

Ms Mondo Mazwai and Prof. lmraan Valodia concurring.

20 February 2019

Date

Tribunal Researcher

: Hlumelo Vazi

For the merging parties : X Nyali of Bowman Gilfillan Inc

For the Commission

: I Mhlongo and W Gumbi

[1] Platinum group metals are six pure metals with high melting points which consist of the following: platinum, (Pt), palladium (Pd), Rhodium (Rh), Iridium (Ir), Osmium (Os), ruthenium (Ru) as well as gold (Au) based metals such as nickel, copper and cobalt.

[2] Transcript, page 4.

[3] Merger Record, pages 9 and 83.

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

Competition Act, No. 89 of 1998

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.