CDC Group Plc v DiverCity Urban Property Fund (LM182Jan21) [2021] ZACT 9 (1 March 2021)

CDC Group Plc v DiverCity Urban Property Fund (LM182Jan21) [2021] ZACT 9 (1 March 2021)

The Tribunal found that CDC Group is not active in the property sector in South Africa and does not control any firm in that sector. Therefore, there is no horizontal overlap between the activities of the merging parties. Post-merger, the merged entity will continue to face competition from several established property companies. The transaction does not give rise to any competition or public interest concerns. Accordingly, the Tribunal approved the proposed transaction unconditionally.

Citation
[2021] ZACT 9
Parties
Applicant: CDC Group PLC; Respondent: DiverCity Urban Property Fund (Pty) Ltd
Court
Competition Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
1 March 2021
Case Number
LM182Jan21
Procedural Posture
Merger Control / Approval
Outcome
Unconditional approval of the proposed merger.
Judges
E Daniels, M Mazwai, H Cheadle
Legal Topics
Merger Control, Joint Control, Public Interest, Horizontal Overlap
Competition Law Commercial and Corporate Merger Control Joint Control Public Interest Horizontal Overlap

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CDC Group PLC

Applicant

DiverCity Urban Property Fund (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Merger Control / Approval

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proposed acquisition of 35% of DiverCity by CDC Group raises competition concerns in the property sector.
  2. 2 Whether the transaction gives rise to any public interest concerns.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that CDC Group is not active in the property sector in South Africa and does not control any firm in that sector. Therefore, there is no horizontal overlap between the activities of the merging parties. Post-merger, the merged entity will continue to face competition from several established property companies. The transaction does not give rise to any competition or public interest concerns. Accordingly, the Tribunal approved the proposed transaction unconditionally.

Court Disposition

Unconditional approval of the proposed merger.

Orders

  • The proposed transaction is approved unconditionally.