Computicket (Pty) Ltd v Competition Commission of South Africa (170/CAC/Feb19) [2019] ZACAC 4 (23 October 2019)

Computicket (Pty) Ltd v Competition Commission of South Africa (170/CAC/Feb19) [2019] ZACAC 4 (23 October 2019)

The Court found that Computicket, as a dominant firm with over 95% market share in outsourced ticket distribution services, imposed and strictly enforced exclusivity clauses in its contracts with inventory providers from 2005 to 2010. These clauses required inventory providers not to deal with competing ticketing agents, foreclosing the market to rivals and impeding competition. The Court held that the exclusivity provisions constituted an exclusionary act under section 8(d)(i) of the Competition Act. The Commission established anti-competitive effects, including foreclosure, reduced innovation, higher prices, and diminished consumer choice. Computicket failed to demonstrate any...

Citation
[2019] ZACAC 4
Parties
Appellant: Computicket (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Competition Commission of South Africa
Court
Competition Appeal Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
23 October 2019
Case Number
170/CAC/Feb19
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Competition Tribunal Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.
Judges
Boqwana, Davis, Unterhalter
Legal Topics
Abuse of Dominance, Exclusive Dealing, Foreclosure, Efficiency Defence, Administrative Penalty
Competition Law Commercial and Corporate Abuse of Dominance Exclusive Dealing Foreclosure Efficiency Defence Administrative Penalty

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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Computicket (Pty) Ltd

Appellant

Competition Commission of South Africa

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Competition Tribunal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Computicket's exclusive contracts with inventory providers constituted an abuse of dominance under section 8(d)(i) of the Competition Act.
  2. 2 Whether the exclusive agreements had anti-competitive effects in the market for outsourced ticket distribution services.
  3. 3 Whether Computicket could justify its conduct on the basis of technological, efficiency or other pro-competitive gains.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that Computicket, as a dominant firm with over 95% market share in outsourced ticket distribution services, imposed and strictly enforced exclusivity clauses in its contracts with inventory providers from 2005 to 2010. These clauses required inventory providers not to deal with competing ticketing agents, foreclosing the market to rivals and impeding competition. The Court held that the exclusivity provisions constituted an exclusionary act under section 8(d)(i) of the Competition Act. The Commission established anti-competitive effects, including foreclosure, reduced innovation, higher prices, and diminished consumer choice. Computicket failed to demonstrate any...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs including costs of two counsel.