Download PDF

South Africa Order

Competition Tribunal

CTP Ltd v The Business Which Manufactures Laminates for Bag-In-Box System, Which is Currently Operated by Amcor Flexibles South Africa (Pty) Ltd (LM010Apr22) [2022] ZACT 23 (21 July 2022)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The Tribunal found that the merger notification was properly submitted and that the Competition Commission recommended approval. There was no evidence before the Tribunal that the proposed transaction would substantially prevent or lessen competition in any relevant market. The requirements of section 16(2)(a) of the Competition Act were satisfied, and no public interest concerns were raised. Accordingly, the Tribunal approved the merger and ordered the issuance of a Merger Clearance Certificate.

Court disposition

Merger approved; clearance certificate issued.

Orders

  • The merger between CTP Ltd and the target business operated by Amcor Flexibles South Africa (Pty) Ltd is approved in terms of section 16(2)(a) of the Competition Act.
  • A Merger Clearance Certificate is to be issued in terms of Competition Tribunal Rule 35(5)(a).

02

Material facts

Parties

CTP Ltd

Applicant

The Business Which Manufactures Laminates for Bag-In-Box System, Which is Currently Operated by Amcor Flexibles South Africa (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Merger Application / Final Determination

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The applicant submitted a merger notification to the Competition Commission, seeking approval for the acquisition of the business manufacturing laminates for the Bag-In-Box system, currently operated by Amcor Flexibles South Africa (Pty) Ltd. The applicant argued that the merger complies with the requirements of the Competition Act and does not substantially prevent or lessen competition.
Respondent
The respondent did not oppose the merger and complied with the notification process. No adverse submissions were made regarding the competitive effects of the transaction.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Competition Act, 1998, section 16(2)(a)

    A merger may be approved if it does not substantially prevent or lessen competition, or if any such effect can be justified on public interest grounds.

  2. 02

    Competition Tribunal Rule 35(5)(a)

    The Tribunal must issue a Merger Clearance Certificate upon approval of a merger in accordance with its rules.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The Tribunal found that the merger notification was properly submitted and that the Competition Commission recommended approval. There was no evidence before the Tribunal that the proposed transaction would substantially prevent or lessen competition in any relevant market. The requirements of section 16(2)(a) of the Competition Act were satisfied, and no public interest concerns were raised. Accordingly, the Tribunal approved the merger and ordered the issuance of a Merger Clearance Certificate.

Obiter and limits

  • The Tribunal notes the efficiency of the merger notification and approval process in this matter.
  • No third-party objections or concerns were raised during the proceedings.

Court disposition

Merger approved; clearance certificate issued.

  • The merger between CTP Ltd and the target business operated by Amcor Flexibles South Africa (Pty) Ltd is approved in terms of section 16(2)(a) of the Competition Act.
  • A Merger Clearance Certificate is to be issued in terms of Competition Tribunal Rule 35(5)(a).

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.

Source document

Competition Tribunal

Order

[2022] ZACT 23

COMPETITION

TRIBUNAL OF SOUTH AFRICA

Case No.: LM010Apr22

In the matter between:

CTP Ltd Primary Acquiring Firm

And

The Business Which Manufactures Laminates for

Bag-In-Box System, Which is Currently Operated by

Amcor Flexibles South Africa (Pty) Ltd Primary Target Firm

Panel: L Mncube (Presiding Member)

Y Carrim (Tribunal Member)

T Vilakazi (Tribunal Member)

Heard on: 21

July 2022

Decided on: 21

July 2022

ORDER

Further to the recommendation of the Competition Commission in terms of section 14A(1)(b) of the Competition Act, 1998 (“the Act”) the Competition Tribunal orders that -

1. the merger between the abovementioned parties be approved in terms of section 16(2)(a) of the Act; and

2. a Merger Clearance Certificate be issued in terms of Competition Tribunal Rule 35(5)(a).

Date: 21 July 2022

Presiding Member: Professor Liberty Mncube

Concurring: Ms Yasmin Carrim and Dr. Thando Vilakazi

Merger Clearance Certificate

Date: 21 July 2022

To: Nortons Attorneys

Case Number: LM010Apr22

CTP Ltd And The Business Which Manufactures Laminates for Bag-In-Box System, Which is Currently Operated by Amcor Flexibles South Africa (Pty) Ltd

You applied to the Competition Commission on 19 April 2022 for merger approval in accordance with Chapter 3 of the Competition Act.

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

Competition Act, 1998

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Competition Tribunal Rules

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

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.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.