Guardrisk Life Limited v Long Term Credit Life Insurance Policies (LM193Jan17) [2017] ZACT 44; [2017] 1 CPLR 297 (CT) (9 May 2017)
- Citation
- [2017] ZACT 44
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Court
- Competition Tribunal
- Panel
- Y Carrim, M Mokuena, A Ndoni
- Case number
- LM193Jan17
More details
- Court
- Competition Tribunal
- Panel
- Y Carrim, M Mokuena, A Ndoni
- Case number
- LM193Jan17
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The Tribunal found that the proposed merger between Guardrisk and the target credit life insurance policies would not substantially prevent or lessen competition in either the individual or corporate group long-term credit life insurance markets in South Africa. The merged entity's market share, while notable, would not confer market power due to the presence of strong competitors and the statutory right of customers to select their insurer. The transaction did not raise any public interest concerns. The Tribunal therefore approved the merger without conditions.
Court disposition
Merger approved without conditions.
Orders
- The large merger between Guardrisk Life Limited and the target credit life insurance policies is approved without conditions.
02
Material facts
Parties
Guardrisk Life Limited
Applicant Counsel: Daryl DingfeyThe Long Term Credit Life Insurance Policies Currently Underwritten by the Standard General Insurance Company Limited
RespondentAmounts and remedies
- Individual Long Term Credit Life Insurance Post Merger Market Share (%): 30.13
- Individual Long Term Credit Life Insurance Market Share Accretion (%): 6.01
- Corporate Group Long Term Credit Life Insurance Post Merger Market Share (%): 23.38
- Corporate Group Long Term Credit Life Insurance Market Share Accretion (%): 22.25
03
Procedural history
Posture
Merger Approval / Final Determination
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the proposed merger would substantially prevent or lessen competition in the relevant markets.
- 02
Whether the merger raises any public interest concerns.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Guardrisk and Stangen submitted that the transaction is intended to settle material litigation between them and to enable the newly established African Bank group to meet all insurance needs of its customers through a cell captive structure with Guardrisk. They argued that strong competitors exist in the market, and customers retain freedom of choice under s106(4)(a) of the National Credit Act, which would constrain any potential market power post-merger.
- Respondent
- The Competition Commission agreed with the merging parties, finding that the merged entity's market share would not enable it to unilaterally raise prices due to the presence of strong competitors. The Commission emphasized that s106(4)(a) of the National Credit Act allows customers to choose their insurer, mitigating any risk of anti-competitive conduct. The Commission concluded that the transaction would not result in unilateral effects or lessen competition in the identified markets.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Competition Act No 89 of 1998
A merger may only be prohibited if it is likely to substantially prevent or lessen competition in any relevant market.
- 02
National Credit Act, s106(4)(a)
Customers have the right to choose their insurer for the duration of a credit agreement or debt.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The Tribunal found that the proposed merger between Guardrisk and the target credit life insurance policies would not substantially prevent or lessen competition in either the individual or corporate group long-term credit life insurance markets in South Africa. The merged entity's market share, while notable, would not confer market power due to the presence of strong competitors and the statutory right of customers to select their insurer. The transaction did not raise any public interest concerns. The Tribunal therefore approved the merger without conditions.
Obiter and limits
- The restructuring of African Bank and the creation of RDS and the new African Bank group were necessary to safeguard the South African financial system.
- The statutory assignment mechanism under the Competition Act facilitates efficient transfer of insurance portfolios in merger transactions.
Court disposition
Merger approved without conditions.
- The large merger between Guardrisk Life Limited and the target credit life insurance policies is approved without conditions.
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.
Competition Tribunal
Judgment
COMPETITION
TRIBUNAL OF SOUTH AFRICA
Case No: LM193Jan17
In the matter between:
GUARDRISK
LIFE
LIMITED
Acquiring Firm
And
THE
LONG TERM CREDIT LIFE INSURANCE POLICIES Target
Firm
CURRENTLY
UNDERWRITTEN BY THE STANDARD
GENERAL
INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED IN RELATION
TO
THE CREDIT LIFE AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO
BETWEEN RESIDUAL DEBT SERVICES LIMITED (UNDER
CURATORSHIP)
AND ITS CREDIT CUSTOMERS AND THE
CREDIT
LIFE AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO BETWEEN
AFRICAN
BANK LIMITED AND ITS CUSTOMERS
Panel
: Yasmin Carrim (Presiding Member)
: Medi Mokuena (Tribunal Member)
: Andiswa Ndoni (Tribunal Member)
Heard on
: 29 March 2017
Order Issued on
: 29 March 2017
Reasons Issued on : 09 May 2017
REASONS
FOR DECISION
APPROVAL
[1] On 29 March 2017, the Competition Tribunal approved the large merger between Guardrisk Life Limited ("Guardrisk") and The Long Term Credit Life Insurance Policies Currently Underwritten by the Standard General Insurance Company Limited ("Stangen") in relation to The Credit Life Agreement Entered into between Residual Debt Services Limited (Under Curatorship) ("RDS") and its Credit Customers and The Credit Life Agreement entered into between African Bank Limited and its Customers.
[2] The reasons for the approval follow.
PARTIES
TO THE TRANSACTION AND THEIR ACTIVITIES
Primary Acquiring Firm
[3] The primary acquiring firm is Guardrisk, a public company wholly incorporated in accordance with the company laws of the Republic of South Africa. Guardrisk is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Guardrisk Group (Pty) Ltd which is, in turn, a wholly listed subsidiary of MMI Strategic Investments (Pty) Ltd, ultimately controlled by MMI Holdings Limited (collectively "the MMI Group"), a public company listed on the Johannesburg Securities Exchange Limited ("JSE"). Guardrisk does not directly or indirectly control any firms.
[4] The MMI group develops, markets, and distributes a variety of short term and long term insurance products and offers asset management,
savings, investment, healthcare administration, short term insurance, and employee benefits cover services as well as providing long term credit life products in South Africa.
[5] Within the MMI group, Guardrisk provides long term alternative risk transfer insurance products to corporates and retirement funds to cover post-retirement healthcare liabilities and to self-insure employee risk benefits.
Primary Target Firm
[6] The target businesses are the businesses of the Master Policies issued by Stangen in respect of customers of the lending units of RDS and African bank Limited and the Group Policies concluded between Stangen and RDS.
[7] The Master Policies are comprised of the credit life insurance policies issued on 28 October 2008[1] and the credit life insurance policies issued on 22 April 2010.[2] The policyholders in respect of the Master Policies are the individual credit customers of RDS and African Bank Limited.[3] The Master Policies insure repayment of a loan in the event of the death of disability of the party taking out such a loan.
[8] The Group Policies are comprised of group policy number ABL/GRP/08/12 concluded between Stangen and RDS on 23 August 2012 and group policy number ABL/GRP/08/15 concluded between Stangen and RDS on 30 July 2015. The policyholder in respect of the group policies is RDS.
[9] The seller of the policies in question is Stangen, a long term insurer which underwrites and provides credit life insurance and funeral policies in respect of customers of its sister subsidiary RDS, and African Bank Limited. Stangen is a public company incorporated in accordance with the laws of the Republic of South Africa and a wholly owned subsidiary of Africa Bank Investment Limited (ABIL).[4] ABIL controls a number of subsidiaries in addition to Stangen, most notably to the transaction before us is RDS (previously Africa Bank Limited).
History of RDS, Good Bank and Africa Bank Limited
[10] In August 2014, RDS (then African Bank Limited) was placed under curatorship, initiating the sequence of events leading to the transaction considered in these reasons.
[11] Preceding the placing of RDS (then African Bank Limited) under curatorship, The South African Reserve Bank ("SARB"),
concerned with impact the failure of the then Africa Bank Limited would have on the South African economy, proposed a restructuring
proposal on which a consortium of South African banks acted. The consortium created "New HoldCo Limited", with "Good
Bank" being its wholly owned subsidiary. As per the SARB's proposal, Good Bank was to inherit all the 'good banking businesses' of the failing African Bank Limited.
[12] On 4 April 2016, the entity now known as RDS changed its name from African Bank Limited to Residual Debt Services (RDS). On the same date Good Bank (being the wholly owned subsidiary of New Holdco Limited) changed its name to African Bank. New HoldCo Limited (the entity constructed by the consortium of banks) changed its name to African Bank Holdings Limited.
[13] At the same time, the banking business of RDS in respect of those loans identified as having a high likelihood of repayment ("good loans") were transferred from RDS to African Bank. The businesses in respect of any other loans ("bad loans")
remained with RDS.
[14] The cover in respect of the Master Policies for both good and bad loans remained with Stangen as did all cover in terms of the Group Policies in respect of bad loans. All cover in terms of the Group Policies in respect of any good loans reduced to zero and came to an end based on the fact that the outstanding loan amounts for good loans in the hands of RDS reduced to zero.
PROPOSED
TRANSACTION AND RATIONALE
[15] In terms of the proposed transaction, Stangen will transfer the Master Policies and Group Policies by means of statutory assignment
to Guardrisk. The consequence of the transaction will be that Guardrisk becomes the primary insurer in respect of the Master Policies and Group Policies. Stangen will cease to be the primary insurer in respect of the master policies and group policies. Guardrisk will, as a consequence of the transfer, directly control the target businesses in terms of, inter alia, section 12(1)(a) of the Competition Act No 89 of 1998, as amended.
[16] In terms of rationale, the merging parties submitted that the purpose of the proposed transaction is to give effect to an agreement reached between the parties in the settlement of material litigation between them. The parties further submit that the newly established
Africa Bank group wishes, subject to the freedom of choice rights of its customers, to cater for all the
insurance needs of its customers through its relationship with Guardrisk in terms of which it has established a cell captive structure.
RELEVANT
MARKETS AND IMPACT ON COMPETITION
[17] On the Commission's analysis, the merging parties are both active in the narrow market for the provision of individual long term credit life insurance products in South Africa and the market for the provision of corporate group long-term credit life insurance products in South Africa.
[18] In addressing the horizontal overlap in the market for the provision of individual long term credit life insurance products, the Commission submitted that the merged entity would possess a 30.13% market share with a market share accretion of approximately 6.01%. The merging parties submitted that there are a number of strong competitors in the market which would be able to constrain the post-merger entity from exercising market power. The Commission, in agreement with the merging parties, further submitted that s106(4)(a) of the National Credit Act, provides that a customer is entitled to choose the insurer who will provide cover for the duration of a credit agreement or debt. The Commission submitted that s106(4)(a) would entitle a customer to substitute their existing policy for one of their own choice should the merged entity unilaterally raise prices.
[19] In the market for the provision of corporate group long-term credit life insurance products in South Africa, the Commission found the post-merger entity to have a post-merger market share of approximately 23.38% with an accretion of 22.25%. In agreement with the merging parties, the Commission found that the merged entity would not have the ability to unilaterally increase prices post merger owing to the presence of strong, established competitors in the market.
[20] The Commission concludes in its report that the proposed transaction is unlikely to give rise to unilateral effects in the markets for the provision of individual long term credit life insurance products in South Africa and for the provision of corporate group long-term credit life insurance products in South Africa. We see no reason to differ from this conclusion.
[21] The merger does not present a threat of preventing or lessening competition in any of the identified markets.
CONCLUSION
[22] The merger is unlikely to substantially prevent or lessen competition in the provision of individual long term credit life insurance products in South Africa and the market for the provision of corporate group long-term credit life insurance products in South Africa.
[23] The merger additionally does not raise any public interest concerns.
[24] Accordingly we approved the transaction without conditions.
09 May 2017
Date
______
Ms. Y Carrim
Ms. A Ndoni and Mrs. M Mokuena concurring
Tribunal Researcher: Alistair Dey-Van Heerden
For the Merging Parties: Daryl Dingfey of Webber Wentzel
For the Commission: Daniela Bove
[1] Policy number ABUCOM/11/08
[2] Policy Number ABUCOM/04/ 10
[3] African Bank Limited was previously known as "Goo d Bank".
[4] ABIL is a company incorporated in the Republic of South Africa and listed in the JSE
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.