Devland Cash and Carry (Pty) Ltd v Certain stores of Masscash (Pty) Ltd (LM163Dev20) [2021] ZACT 22 (24 March 2021)
The Tribunal found that the proposed transaction would not substantially prevent or lessen competition in any of the relevant grocery retail or wholesale markets, as the merged entity's market shares would remain low and significant competitors would continue to constrain its market power. The Tribunal also determined that the transaction would not result in any retrenchments, as the parties undertook to retain all affected employees and agreed to a nine-month moratorium on retrenchments post-implementation. Furthermore, the transaction would increase the spread of ownership by HDPs, as the acquiring firm is HDP-owned while the target stores are not. The merger was therefore approved...
- Citation
- [2021] ZACT 22
- Parties
- Applicant: Devland Cash and Carry (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Certain stores of Masscash (Pty) Ltd
- Court
- Competition Tribunal
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 24 March 2021
- Case Number
- LM163Dev20
- Procedural Posture
- Merger Application / Conditional Approval
- Outcome
- Merger conditionally approved subject to a nine-month moratorium on retrenchments and compliance monitoring.
- Judges
- Y Carrim, E Daniels, F Tregenna
- Legal Topics
- Merger Control, Public Interest Conditions, Employment Protection, Spread of Ownership
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Devland Cash and Carry (Pty) Ltd
Applicant
Certain stores of Masscash (Pty) Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Merger Application / Conditional Approval
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the proposed acquisition of certain Masscash stores by Devland Cash and Carry will substantially prevent or lessen competition in the relevant grocery retail and wholesale markets.
- 2 Whether the transaction raises any public interest concerns, particularly regarding employment and the spread of ownership by Historically Disadvantaged Persons (HDPs).
Ratio Decidendi
The Tribunal found that the proposed transaction would not substantially prevent or lessen competition in any of the relevant grocery retail or wholesale markets, as the merged entity's market shares would remain low and significant competitors would continue to constrain its market power. The Tribunal also determined that the transaction would not result in any retrenchments, as the parties undertook to retain all affected employees and agreed to a nine-month moratorium on retrenchments post-implementation. Furthermore, the transaction would increase the spread of ownership by HDPs, as the acquiring firm is HDP-owned while the target stores are not. The merger was therefore approved...
Court Disposition
Merger conditionally approved subject to a nine-month moratorium on retrenchments and compliance monitoring.
Orders
- The merger is approved subject to the condition that no employees shall be retrenched for a period of nine months from the implementation date, except for specified exclusions such as voluntary separation, early retirement, or lawful operational requirements unrelated to the merger.
- The merging parties must circulate the conditions to all employees within five days of approval and provide proof of compliance to the Commission.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment