Attacq Waterfall Investment Company (Pty) Ltd v Pocket 3 and Pocket 24 on Portion 1 of the Waterfall Farm 5 (LM090Sep23) [2023] ZACT 79 (4 December 2023)

Attacq Waterfall Investment Company (Pty) Ltd v Pocket 3 and Pocket 24 on Portion 1 of the Waterfall Farm 5 (LM090Sep23) [2023] ZACT 79 (4 December 2023)

The Tribunal found that the proposed transaction would not result in a substantial prevention or lessening of competition in the relevant market for rentable light industrial property within a 15 km radius in Midrand, as the combined market share of the merging parties would remain below 15%. The Tribunal also...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] ZACT 79
Parties
Applicant: Attacq Waterfall Investment Company (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Pocket 3 and Pocket 24 on Portion 1 of the Waterfall Farm 5
Court
Competition Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Case Number
LM090Sep23
Procedural Posture
Large Merger / Merger Approval
Outcome
The merger is unconditionally approved.
Judges
AW Wessels, T Vilakazi, G Budlender
Legal Topics
Large Merger Review, Horizontal Overlap, Public Interest Employment, Black Economic Empowerment, Industrial Property Market, Development Rights
Competition Law Commercial and Corporate Land and Property Large Merger Review Horizontal Overlap Public Interest Employment Black Economic Empowerment Industrial Property Market +1 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Attacq Waterfall Investment Company (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Pocket 3 and Pocket 24 on Portion 1 of the Waterfall Farm 5

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Large Merger / Merger Approval

  1. 1 Whether the proposed merger will result in a substantial prevention or lessening of competition in the relevant market.
  2. 2 Whether the transaction raises any adverse public interest concerns, including employment and spread of ownership.
  3. 3 Whether the increase in historically disadvantaged persons (HDPs) shareholding post-merger is sufficient.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the proposed transaction would not result in a substantial prevention or lessening of competition in the relevant market for rentable light industrial property within a 15 km radius in Midrand, as the combined market share of the merging parties would remain below 15%. The Tribunal also considered the existence of viable alternatives in the market, such as other large industrial property developments. Regarding public interest, the Tribunal determined that there would be no adverse effect on employment, as neither the Target Firm nor JVCO has employees, and employee representatives raised no concerns. The Tribunal further found that the transaction would increase...

Court Disposition

The merger is unconditionally approved.

Orders

  • The proposed transaction is approved without conditions.