BOE Private Equity (Pty) Ltd and Another v Heritage Capital Fund (LM182Sep18) [2018] ZACT 49 (21 November 2018)
- Citation
- [2018] ZACT 49
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Court
- Competition Tribunal
- Panel
- Enver Daniels, Mondo Mazwai, Fiona Tregenna
- Case number
- LM182Sep18
More details
- Court
- Competition Tribunal
- Panel
- Enver Daniels, Mondo Mazwai, Fiona Tregenna
- Case number
- LM182Sep18
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The Tribunal found that there are no overlaps in the activities of the acquiring firms and the target firm, and thus the proposed transaction would not result in a substantial lessening of competition. The Commission's investigation confirmed this finding. Furthermore, the transaction does not raise any public interest concerns, including employment effects. As a result, the Tribunal approved the merger unconditionally.
Court disposition
Merger approved unconditionally.
Orders
- The proposed transaction is approved unconditionally.
02
Material facts
Parties
BOE Private Equity (Pty) Ltd
Applicant Counsel: Albert AukemaHeritage Capital Fund I
Applicant Counsel: Albert AukemaGeneral Profiling (Pty) Ltd
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Merger Approval / Final Determination
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the proposed merger would substantially prevent or lessen competition in any relevant market.
- 02
Whether the transaction raises any public interest concerns, including employment effects.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicants argued that the acquisition aligns with their strategic objectives and will allow Heritage Capital to grow its portfolio. The transaction enables retiring shareholders of General Profiling to realize the value of their shares. They submitted that there would be no negative effect on employment and no other public interest concerns.
- Respondent
- The respondent, General Profiling, supported the transaction as a means for retiring shareholders to realize the value of their shares. The Competition Commission confirmed that there are no overlaps in the parties' activities and that the transaction would not result in a substantial lessening of competition or negative public interest effects.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Competition Act, 89 of 1998
A merger may only be prohibited if it is likely to substantially prevent or lessen competition in any relevant market.
- 02
Competition Act, 89 of 1998
Public interest considerations, including employment effects, must be assessed in merger proceedings.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The Tribunal found that there are no overlaps in the activities of the acquiring firms and the target firm, and thus the proposed transaction would not result in a substantial lessening of competition. The Commission's investigation confirmed this finding. Furthermore, the transaction does not raise any public interest concerns, including employment effects. As a result, the Tribunal approved the merger unconditionally.
Obiter and limits
- The transaction allows for the realization of value by retiring shareholders, which is a legitimate commercial rationale.
- The acquisition supports the strategic objectives of the acquiring firms and promotes portfolio growth for Heritage Capital.
Court disposition
Merger approved unconditionally.
- The proposed transaction is approved unconditionally.
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 OF SOUTH AFRICA
Case No: LM182Sep18
In the matter between:
BOE Private Equity (Pty) Ltd
Heritage Capital Fund I
Acquiring Firms
and
General Profiling (Pty) Ltd
Target Firm
Panel
Enver Daniels (Presiding Member)
Mondo Mazwai (Tribunal Member)
Fiona Tregenna (Tribunal Member)
Order issued on
24 October 2018
Reasons issued on 21 November 2018
REASONS
FOR DECISION
Approval
[1] On 24 October 2018, the Competition Tribunal ("Tribunal") unconditionally approved the large merger involving the acquiring
firms, BoE Private Equity (Pty) Ltd ("BoE") and Heritage Capital Fund I ("Heritage Capital") and the target firm General Profiling (Pty) Ltd ("General Profiling").
[2] The reasons for approving the proposed transaction follow.
Parties to the transaction and their activities
Primary acquiring firm
[3] The primary acquiring firms are BoE and Heritage Capital. BoE is a wholly owned subsidiary of Nedbank Ltd and is in turn controlled by Old Mutual pie. Heritage Capital is controlled by Heritage Capital GP.
[4] BoE is an investment holding company in respect of a variety of businesses ranging from asset management to short-term insurance. Heritage Capital is a 100 percent black female owned investment group which has a single investment in Aria Technologies Africa (Pty) Ltd.
Primary target firm
[5] The primary target firm is General Profiling (Pty) Ltd, a South African incorporated company which is controlled by Mr. Gavin Poplak.
[6] General Profiling is involved in the steel industry and provides stainless steel and aluminum services ranging from flame cutting to rolling.
Proposed transaction and rationale
[7] In terms of the proposed transaction BoE and Heritage Capital would acquire 30 percent of the issued share capital in General Profiling
and will exercise joint control post-transaction.
[8] BoE has submitted that its rationale for the transaction is that the acquisition is in line with its strategic objectives. Heritage
Capital submitted that the proposed transaction would allow it to grow its portfolio. General Profiling submitted that the proposed
transaction would allow retiring shareholders to realize the value of their shares.
Relevant market and impact on competition
[9] The Commission identified no overlaps in the activities of the parties as the acquiring firms do not provide any services provided by General Profiling. Accordingly, the Commission submitted that the proposed transaction would not result in a substantial lessening of competition.
[10] We concur with the Commission's finding that the proposed transaction is unlikely to substantially prevent or lessen competition as there is no overlaps.
Public interest
[11] The merging parties submitted, which was confirmed by the Commission, that the proposed transaction will not have any negative effect on employment.[1]
[12] The proposed transaction further raises no other public interest concerns.
Conclusion
[13] In light of the above, we conclude that the proposed transaction is unlikely to substantially prevent or lessen competition in any relevant market. In addition, no public interest issues arise from the proposed transaction. Accordingly, we approve the proposed transaction unconditionally.
Mr Enver Daniels
Ms Mondo Mazwai and Prof Fiona Tregenna concurring
21 November 2018
Date
Tribunal Case Manager Ms Aneesa Ravat
For the merging parties Mr Albert Aukema of CDH
For the Commission
Ms Rethabile Ncheche
[1] Record pages 78.
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.