Business Venture Investments 1858 (Pty) Ltd v Tiger Automative Investments (Pty) Ltd (020008) [2015] ZACT 11 (14 January 2015)
The Tribunal found that the acquiring firms are investment entities with no direct interests in businesses similar to the target firm, and thus the transaction does not result in any horizontal or vertical overlaps. There is no accretion of market share, and the merger is unlikely to substantially prevent or lessen...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] ZACT 11
- Parties
- Applicant: Business Venture Investments 1858 (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Tiger Automotive Investments (Pty) Ltd
- Court
- Competition Tribunal
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Case Number
- 020008
- Procedural Posture
- Merger Approval / Final Determination
- Outcome
- Merger approved unconditionally.
- Judges
- Norman Manoim, Anton Roskam, Yasmin Carrim
- Legal Topics
- Large Merger, Horizontal and Vertical Overlap, Public Interest, Unconditional Approval
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Business Venture Investments 1858 (Pty) Ltd
Applicant
Tiger Automotive Investments (Pty) Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Merger Approval / Final Determination
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the proposed merger would substantially prevent or lessen competition in any market.
- 2 Whether the transaction raises any public interest concerns.
Ratio Decidendi
The Tribunal found that the acquiring firms are investment entities with no direct interests in businesses similar to the target firm, and thus the transaction does not result in any horizontal or vertical overlaps. There is no accretion of market share, and the merger is unlikely to substantially prevent or lessen competition in any market. Furthermore, the transaction will not result in any retrenchments or other public interest concerns, as the target firm will continue to operate independently. The Tribunal agreed with the Commission's assessment and approved the merger unconditionally.
Court Disposition
Merger approved unconditionally.
Orders
- The large merger between Business Venture Investments 1858 (Pty) Ltd and Tiger Automotive Investments (Pty) Ltd is approved without conditions.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
33 paragraphs
COMPETITION TRIBUNAL OF SOUTH AFRICA
Case No: 020008
In the matter between:
Business Venture Investments 1858 (Pty) Ltd.....................................................Primary Acquiring Firm
And
Tiger Automotive Investments (Pty) Ltd...................................................................Primary Target Firm
Panel: Norman Manoim (Presiding Member)
Anton Roskam (Tribunal Member)
Yasmin Carrim (Tribunal Member)
Heard on: 12 December 2014
Order issued on: 12 December 2014
Reasons issued on :14 January 2015
Reasons for Decision
Approval
[1] On 12 December 2014 the Competition Tribunal (“Tribunal”) unconditionally approved the large merger between Business Venture Investments 1858 (Pty) Ltd (“OpCo”) and Tiger Automotive Investments (Pty) Ltd (“TiAuto”). The reasons for approving the proposed transaction follow.
Parties to transaction
[2] The primary acquiring firm is OpCo, a newly created company that was established for purposes of the proposed transaction. OpCo is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Business Venture Investments 1857 (Proprietary) Limited (“HoldCo”). The shareholders of HoldCo are certain funds managed by affiliates of The Carlyle Group, L.P (“Cariyle”) and Old Mutual Private Equity, a division of Old Mutual Investment Group (Proprietary) Limited, on behalf of certain funds advised by it (“OMPE Fund IV”).
[3] The primary target firm is TiAuto, a private company which is involved in the wholesale and retail supply of passenger car tyres and aftermarket alloy wheels in Southern Africa.
Proposed transaction
[4] Thorough a series of transactions OpCo will acquire the business of TiAuto and its subsidiaries. We were advised at the hearing that present management will acquire shares in OpCo at a later stage but that does not form part of the present notified transaction.
Competition assessment
[5] The Commission submitted that the proposed transaction does not give rise to any horizontal or vertical overlaps. This is because the acquiring firms are largely investment entities and they do not have any interest in firms directly involved in similar businesses as the target firm; as such no accretion in market shares will take place. The Commission thus came to the conclusion that the proposed transaction is unlikely to substantially prevent or lessen competition in any market.
Public Interest
[6] The proposed transaction will not result in any retrenchments as the business of TiAuto will continue to operate on a standalone basis and will not be integrated into the acquiring firms. The proposed transaction will result in no other public interest concerns and the Commission thus recommended that the proposed transaction be approved unconditionally.
CONCLUSION
[7] We agree with the Commission that the proposed transaction is unlikely to substantially prevent or lessen competition or harm the public interest and thus approve the transaction without conditions.
14 January 2015
DATE
Mr Norman Manoim
Mr Anton Roskam and Ms Yasmin Carrim concurring.
Tribunal Researcher: Caroline Sserufusa
For the merging parties: Shawn Van Der Meulen of Webber Wentzel
For the Commission:Relebohile Thabane