Bachique 746 (Pty) Ltd v Afrikelp (Pty) Ltd and Others (LM274Mar19) [2019] ZACT 47 (28 August 2019)
- Citation
- [2019] ZACT 47
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Court
- Competition Tribunal
- Panel
- Yasmin Carrim, Andreas Wessels, Fiona Tregenna
- Case number
- LM274Mar19
More details
- Court
- Competition Tribunal
- Panel
- Yasmin Carrim, Andreas Wessels, Fiona Tregenna
- Case number
- LM274Mar19
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The Tribunal found that the proposed transaction would not substantially prevent or lessen competition in any relevant market. The Commission's concerns regarding potential collusion and information exchange between RMBV and BoE were not supported by the evidence, as both entities are small players in the private equity market, operate in different industries, and face significant competition from other market participants. Furthermore, the transaction would not negatively affect employment or raise other public interest concerns. Accordingly, the Tribunal approved the merger unconditionally.
Court disposition
The proposed transaction was approved unconditionally.
Orders
- The merger between Bachique 746 (Pty) Ltd and the target businesses is approved without conditions.
02
Material facts
Parties
Bachique 746 (Pty) Ltd
Applicant Counsel: M Garden and A ScallanAfrikelp (Pty) Ltd
RespondentAfrikelp Holdings (Pty) Ltd
RespondentAfrikelp Investments (Pty) Ltd
RespondentAkusa, Inc.
RespondentTaurus Chemicals Namibia (Pty) Ltd
RespondentTaurus Chemicals Cape Kelp (Pty) Ltd
RespondentRotaq LOderitz (Pty) Ltd
RespondentEfekto Care (Pty) Ltd
RespondentEfekto Zambia Ltd
RespondentAgro-Serve (Pty) Ltd
RespondentAgro-Serve (Pty) Ltd (Namibia)
RespondentMarltons Pets and Products (Pty) Ltd
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Merger Review / Approval
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the proposed merger would substantially prevent or lessen competition in any relevant market.
- 02
Whether the joint shareholding of RMBV and BoE in Bidco could facilitate collusion or information exchange between competitors.
- 03
Whether the transaction raises any public interest concerns, particularly regarding employment.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicant argued that the proposed transaction would not result in any negative effects on competition or employment. Bidco, as a consortium of RMBV, BoE, and Management, would acquire control of the target businesses, which operate in distinct sectors. The applicant maintained that there was no horizontal or vertical overlap between the merging parties and that the transaction would not facilitate collusion or information exchange between RMBV and BoE.
- Respondent
- The Competition Commission raised concerns about the possibility of the consortium serving as a platform for collusion between RMBV and BoE, potentially dampening competition in the private equity market and facilitating the exchange of competitively sensitive information. However, after investigation, the Commission found that RMBV and BoE are small players in the market, face significant competition, and invest in different industries, making collusion unlikely. The Commission also noted that the transaction would not negatively affect employment or raise other public interest concerns.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Competition Act, No. 89 of 1998
A merger may not be approved if it is likely to substantially prevent or lessen competition in any relevant market.
- 02
Competition Act, No. 89 of 1998
The assessment of public interest factors, including the effect on employment, is required in merger proceedings.
- 03
Competition Commission Guidelines
Theories of harm such as collusion and information exchange must be substantiated by evidence of market structure and conduct.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The Tribunal found that the proposed transaction would not substantially prevent or lessen competition in any relevant market. The Commission's concerns regarding potential collusion and information exchange between RMBV and BoE were not supported by the evidence, as both entities are small players in the private equity market, operate in different industries, and face significant competition from other market participants. Furthermore, the transaction would not negatively affect employment or raise other public interest concerns. Accordingly, the Tribunal approved the merger unconditionally.
Obiter and limits
- The Tribunal noted that the mere existence of a consortium does not automatically facilitate collusion unless supported by market evidence.
- The assessment of public interest factors, such as employment, remains a critical aspect of merger review even where competition concerns are absent.
Court disposition
The proposed transaction was approved unconditionally.
- The merger between Bachique 746 (Pty) Ltd and the target businesses 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.
Competition Tribunal
Judgment
Competition tribunal
SOUTH
AFRICA
COMPETITION TRIBUNAL OF
SOUTH AFRICA
Case No: LM274Mar19
In the matter between
Bachique 746 (Pty) Ltd Primary
Acquiring Firm
And
Afrikelp (Pty) Ltd, Afrikelp Holdings (Pty) Ltd, Afrikelp Primary
Target Firms
Investments (Pty) Ltd, Akusa, Inc., Taurus Chemicals
Namibia (Pty) Ltd, Taurus Chemicals Cape Kelp (Pty)
Ltd, Rotaq LOderitz (Pty) Ltd, Efekto Care (Pty) Ltd,
Efekto Zambia Ltd, Agro-Serve (Pty) Ltd, Agro-Serve
(Pty) Ltd (Namibia), Marltons Pets and Products (Pty) Ltd
Panel: Yasmin Carrim (Presiding Member)
: Andreas Wessels (Tribunal Member)
: Fiona Tregenna (Tribunal Member)
Heard on: :17July2019
Order Issued on: 17 July 2019
Reasons Issued on: 28 August 2019
REASONS FOR DECISION
Approval
[1] On 17 July 2019, the Competition Tribunal (''Tribunal") unconditionally approved the proposed transaction involving Bachique
746 (Pty) Ltd ("Bidco'') and the target firms: Afrikelp (Pty) Ltd, Afrikelp Holdings (Pty) Ltd, Afrikelp Investments (Pty) Ltd, Akusa, Inc., Taurus Chemicals Namibia (Pty) Ltd, Taurus Chemicals Cape Kelp (Pty) Ltd, Rotaq LOderitz (Pty) Ltd, Efekto Care (Pty) Ltd, Efekto Zambia Ltd, Agro-Serve (Pty) Ltd, Agro-Serve (Pty) Ltd (Namibia), Marltons Pets and Products (Pty) Ltd, hereinafter
collectively referred to as the Target Businesses'.
[2] The reasons for approval of the proposed transaction follow.
Parties to the transaction
Primary Acquiring Firm
[3] The primary acquiring firm is Bidco, an entity established for purposes of this transaction. Bidco is a consortium consisting of RMB Ventures Seven (Pty) Ltd ("RMBV"), BoE Private Equity Investments (Pty) Ltd ("BoE") and the Management of the Target Businesses ("Management"). RMBV and BoE jointly control the consortium.
[4] RMBV and BoE are the private equity businesses of the FirstRand Group and the Nedbank Group respectively. Both groups are involved in the provision of a broad range of banking and financial services, which includes amongst others retail banking, investment banking and corporate banking.
Primary Target Firms
[5] The Target Businesses are controlled by Ascendis Health Ltd ("Ascendis"). The Target Businesses can be divided into three businesses namely the Afrikelp, Efekto and Marltons Businesses, which form part of the broader Ascendis Biosciences Division. Each business is involved in different activities.
[6] Afrikelp is involved in the processing of seaweed extracts (known as kelp) for the production and supply of plant nutrition products used in the agriculture and horticulture sectors. Afrikelp products are used as bio-stimulants to improve root growth as well as fruit set.[1]
[7] Efekto supplies home and garden pest control products, as well as garden fertiliser and plant food products (which are sold under
the Wonder Brand). Efekto products are sold through national retailers, hardware chains, garden centres, farmers' co operatives and independent stores.
[8] Marltons supplies a diverse range of pet products and accessories except for pet food for dogs and cats. Most of Marltons products are imported and sold under the Marltons label. Marltons products are distributed through national retailers, pet and vet stores, nurseries and co-operatives.
Proposed transaction and rationale
[9] In terms of the Sale Agreement, Bidco will acquire most of the issued share capital in the Target Businesses and will therefore control the Target Businesses post merger.
Impact on competition
[10] The Competition Commission ("Commission") found no horizontal or vertical overlap between the activities of the merging
parties. However, the Commission had concerns around RMBV and BoE's joint shareholding in Bidco and identified possible theories of harm likely to result from the proposed transaction. Thus, it decided to assess the following: (i) whether the consortium would dampen competition between RMBV and BoE in the market for private equity and (ii) whether the proposed transaction will result in information exchange of competitively sensitive information between RMBV and BoE.
[11] The Commission was concerned that the consortium would serve as platform for collusion not only for the consortium members but also their ultimate controllers. The Commission was of the view that RMBV and BoE would enter into an agreement not to compete with each
other in current and future investments. To give effect to the agreement, they would share competitively sensitive information, so they don't offer competing bids.
[12] Despite the concerns, the Commission's investigation revealed that it is unlikely that the proposed transaction will result in coordination and information exchange. First, RMBV and BoE are small players in the private equity market. Should they attempt to collude, their conduct will be constrained by a number of competitors. Secondly, RMBV and BoE invest in various industries that are generally not in competition with one another. Therefore, it is unlikely that they would collude in respect of future investments.
[13] Thirdly, RMBV and BoE not only compete with private equity firms (both local and international) but also other players such as traders, Black Economic Empowerment investors and industrialists. Hence, the coordination would not be externally sustainable.
[14] In light of the above, the Commission concluded that the proposed transaction was unlikely to substantially prevent or lessen
competition in any relevant market. We saw no reason to differ from this conclusion.
Public interest
[15] The merging parties confirmed that the proposed transaction would not have any negative effects on employment in South Africa.
[16] The proposed transaction raised no other public interest concerns.
Conclusion
[17] In light of the above, we approved the proposed transaction unconditionally.
Ms Yasmin Carrim
Mr Andreas Wessels and Prof. Fiona Tregenna concurring.
28 August 2019
Date
Tribunal Researcher:
Hlumelo Vazi
For the merging parties: M Garden and A Scallan of ENSafrica
For the Commission
R Darji and T Masithulela
[1] As a bio-stimulant applied to agricultural crops, kelp gives these plants increased access to additional nutrients by increasing root growth of the plants. Thus, kelp decreases stress in crops caused by growth hormones or growth regulators are readily available in the kelp leaves because sea plants do not have root systems and thus these hormones are readily available in the plant itself.
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.