Aon South Africa (Pty) Ltd and Another v Competition Commission, In re: Aon South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Glenrand MIB Ltd (37/AM/Apr11) [2011] ZACT 100; [2012] 1 CPLR 132 (CT) (24 November 2011)

Aon South Africa (Pty) Ltd and Another v Competition Commission, In re: Aon South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Glenrand MIB Ltd (37/AM/Apr11) [2011] ZACT 100; [2012] 1 CPLR 132 (CT) (24 November 2011)

The Tribunal found that the merging parties had, through several exercises and methodologies, followed a rational process to determine the number and category of employees at risk of retrenchment. The evidence showed that far fewer jobs would be lost than initially anticipated, and greater protection was afforded to unskilled employees. The merging parties justified the need for retrenchments based on Glenrand's poor market performance and the necessity to lower operating costs, which would benefit consumers through lower premiums. The Tribunal held that the conditions proposed, including a two-year moratorium on retrenchments for certain categories of employees and reporting obligations,...

Citation
[2011] ZACT 100
Parties
Applicant: Aon South Africa (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: Glenrand MIB Ltd; Respondent: Competition Commission
Court
Competition Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
24 November 2011
Case Number
37/AM/Apr11
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Merger Consideration and Review of Conditions Imposed by the Competition Commission
Outcome
Merger approved subject to conditions limiting retrenchments and imposing reporting obligations.
Judges
Norman Manoim, Andreas Wessels, Merle Holden
Legal Topics
Merger Control, Public Interest Employment, Retrenchment Conditions, Labour Relations Act, Competition Act Section 16
Competition Law Labour Law Merger Control Public Interest Employment Retrenchment Conditions Labour Relations Act Competition Act Section 16

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Aon South Africa (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Glenrand MIB Ltd

Applicant

Competition Commission

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Merger Consideration and Review of Conditions Imposed by the Competition Commission

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conditions imposed by the Competition Commission regarding retrenchments were justified under the Competition Act.
  2. 2 Whether the merging parties followed a rational process to determine the number and category of employees to be retrenched.
  3. 3 Whether the proposed conditions adequately protect the public interest in employment following the merger.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the merging parties had, through several exercises and methodologies, followed a rational process to determine the number and category of employees at risk of retrenchment. The evidence showed that far fewer jobs would be lost than initially anticipated, and greater protection was afforded to unskilled employees. The merging parties justified the need for retrenchments based on Glenrand's poor market performance and the necessity to lower operating costs, which would benefit consumers through lower premiums. The Tribunal held that the conditions proposed, including a two-year moratorium on retrenchments for certain categories of employees and reporting obligations,...

Court Disposition

Merger approved subject to conditions limiting retrenchments and imposing reporting obligations.

Orders

  • Aon South Africa (Pty) Ltd, Glenrand MIB Ltd, and their subsidiaries shall ensure no dismissals of employees earning less than R15,000 per month due to operational requirements resulting from the merger for two years from 7 April 2011.
  • No more than 24 employees earning between R15,000 and R30,000 per month may be dismissed due to operational requirements resulting from the merger for two years from 7 April 2011.