Grant v Schoemansville Oewer Klub (IR202DEC15) [2016] ZACT 51; [2017] 1 CPLR 190 (CT) (11 July 2016)

Grant v Schoemansville Oewer Klub (IR202DEC15) [2016] ZACT 51; [2017] 1 CPLR 190 (CT) (11 July 2016)

The Tribunal found that the applicant's interim relief application was moot because the club had already restored his access to operate his business prior to the hearing. The Tribunal declined to entertain the new price discrimination claim as it was not formally before the Tribunal nor supported by sufficient evidence. The claim for damages was found to be incompetent in interim relief proceedings. The Tribunal noted the respondent's lack of cooperation and failure to file answering papers, which unnecessarily prolonged the proceedings and justified a costs order against the respondent.

Citation
[2016] ZACT 51
Parties
Applicant: JG Grant; Respondent: Schoemansville Oewer Klub
Court
Competition Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 July 2016
Case Number
IR202Dec15
Procedural Posture
Interim Relief Application / Order Issued After Hearing
Outcome
Application for interim relief dismissed as moot; costs awarded against respondent.
Judges
Y Carrim, A Ndoni, M Mazwai
Legal Topics
Interim Relief, Exclusionary Conduct, Price Discrimination, Access to Facilities, Section 9 1, Costs Award
Competition Law Interim Relief Exclusionary Conduct Price Discrimination Access to Facilities Section 9 1 Costs Award

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

JG Grant

Applicant

Schoemansville Oewer Klub

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interim Relief Application / Order Issued After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to interim relief preventing the club from terminating his right to operate a boat charter business on the Dam.
  2. 2 Whether the club engaged in exclusionary conduct or prohibited price discrimination under the Competition Act.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's claim for damages is competent in an interim relief application.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the applicant's interim relief application was moot because the club had already restored his access to operate his business prior to the hearing. The Tribunal declined to entertain the new price discrimination claim as it was not formally before the Tribunal nor supported by sufficient evidence. The claim for damages was found to be incompetent in interim relief proceedings. The Tribunal noted the respondent's lack of cooperation and failure to file answering papers, which unnecessarily prolonged the proceedings and justified a costs order against the respondent.

Court Disposition

Application for interim relief dismissed as moot; costs awarded against respondent.

Orders

  • The applicant's interim relief application under case number IR202Dec15 is dismissed.
  • The respondent must grant access to any member of the public on payment of the prevailing gate fee.