Indluplace Properties Limited v Diluculo Properties Proprietary Limited (LM023Apr17) [2017] ZACT 14 (26 June 2017)
- Citation
- [2017] ZACT 14
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Court
- Competition Tribunal
- Panel
- AW Wessels, M Mazwai, I Valodia
- Case number
- LM023Apr17
More details
- Court
- Competition Tribunal
- Panel
- AW Wessels, M Mazwai, I Valodia
- Case number
- LM023Apr17
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The Tribunal found that the proposed transaction presents a horizontal overlap in the market for rentable space in affordable housing property. However, based on market share estimates and competitor feedback, the merging parties' combined market share in each affected geographic area would be less than 10%. The Tribunal noted that only a small increment in market share would result from the merger and that sufficient alternative affordable housing options would remain available. No adverse public interest concerns, including employment effects, were identified. Accordingly, the Tribunal concluded that the merger is unlikely to substantially prevent or lessen competition in any relevant market and raises no public interest issues. The transaction was approved unconditionally.
Court disposition
Merger approved unconditionally.
Orders
- The large merger between Indluplace Properties Limited and Diluculo Properties Proprietary Limited is approved unconditionally.
02
Material facts
Parties
Indluplace Properties Limited
Applicant Counsel: Ms Vani ChettyDiluculo Properties Proprietary Limited
RespondentAmounts and remedies
- Combined Market Share in Affected Geographic Areas: 10
03
Procedural history
Posture
Merger Approval / Final Determination
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the proposed merger between Indluplace Properties and Diluculo Properties is likely to substantially prevent or lessen competition in any relevant market.
- 02
Whether the transaction raises any adverse public interest concerns, including employment effects.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Indluplace Properties argued that the acquisition of Diluculo Properties would complement its existing property portfolio, as Diluculo's properties are yield enhancing and fit within Indluplace's focus on affordable housing. The merging parties submitted that their combined market share in each affected geographic area would be less than 10%, and that sufficient alternative rentable affordable housing properties would remain available post-merger. They confirmed that no retrenchments or job losses would result from the transaction.
- Respondent
- Diluculo Investments and its controllers no longer considered Diluculo Properties a core asset and resolved to sell it. The respondent did not oppose the merger and confirmed that the transaction would not negatively impact employment or raise other public interest concerns.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Competition Act 89 of 1998
A merger may only be prohibited if it is likely to substantially prevent or lessen competition in any relevant market.
- 02
Competition Act 89 of 1998
Public interest considerations, including employment effects, must be assessed in merger proceedings.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The Tribunal found that the proposed transaction presents a horizontal overlap in the market for rentable space in affordable housing property. However, based on market share estimates and competitor feedback, the merging parties' combined market share in each affected geographic area would be less than 10%. The Tribunal noted that only a small increment in market share would result from the merger and that sufficient alternative affordable housing options would remain available. No adverse public interest concerns, including employment effects, were identified. Accordingly, the Tribunal concluded that the merger is unlikely to substantially prevent or lessen competition in any relevant market and raises no public interest issues. The transaction was approved unconditionally.
Obiter and limits
- The Tribunal took no view on the exact scope of the relevant geographic market, noting that the market share increment in each area is small and alternatives are available.
- The merging parties confirmed that there would be no retrenchments or job losses as a result of the transaction.
Court disposition
Merger approved unconditionally.
- The large merger between Indluplace Properties Limited and Diluculo Properties Proprietary Limited is approved unconditionally.
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: LM023Apr17
In the matter between
lndluplace Properties Limited
Primary Acquiring Firm
And
Diluculo Properties Proprietary Limited
Primary Target Firm
Panel
: Mr AW Wessels (Presiding Member)
: Ms M Mazwai (Tribunal Member)
: Prof. I Valodia (Tribunal Member)
Heard on
: 14 June 2017
Order Issued on : 14 June 2017
Reasons Issued on : 26 June 2017
REASONS
FOR DECISION
APPROVAL
[1] On 14 June 2017, the Competition Tribunal ("Tribunal") unconditionally approved the large merger between lndluplace
Properties Limited ("lndluplace Properties") and Diluculo Properties Proprietary Limited ("Diluculo Properties"),
herein collectively referred to as the merging parties.
[2] The reasons for the approval follow.
PARTIES
TO THE PROPOSED TRANSACTION
Primary Acquiring Firm
[3] The primary acquiring firm is lndluplace Properties, a company incorporated in accordance with the laws of the Republic of South
Africa. lndluplace Properties is controlled by Arrowhead Properties Limited. lndluplace Properties controls a number of firms.
[4] lndluplace Properties is a property investment company which holds a large residential property portfolio. It invests in residential
properties with a focus on affordable housing generally in large urban centres.
Primary Target Firm
[5] The primary target firm is Diluculo Properties, a company incorporated in accordance with the laws of the Republic of South
Africa. Pre-merger Diluculo Properties is a wholly owned subsidiary of Diluculo Investments Proprietary Limited ("Diluculo
Investments"), which is in turn wholly owned by Barclays Africa Group Limited. Diluculo Properties does not control any firm.
[6] Diluculo Properties invests in income producing residential properties. It owns eight residential property letting enterprises in the Free State and in Gauteng.
PROPOSED
TRANSACTION AND RATIONALE
[7] lndluplace Properties intends to acquire the entire issued share capital of Diluculo Properties from Diluculo Investments. Post-merger
Jndluplace Properties will therefore exercise sole control over Diluculo Properties.
[8] According to lndluplace Properties, Diluculo Properties' property portfolio comprises yield enhancing properties and complements its own property portfolio.
[9] Diluculo Investments and its controllers no longer view Diluculo Properties as a core asset and thus they have resolved to sell it.
COMPETITION
ANALYSIS
[10] The Competition Commission ("Commission") considered the activities of the merging parties and found that the proposed
transaction presents a horizontal overlap since both the merging parties are active in the market for the provision of rentable space in affordable housing property. From a geographic market perspective, the Commission assessed the properties of the merging parties in the Johannesburg CBD and surrounding nodes, Pretoria CBD and surrounding nodes, Centurion and Region A, Ekurhuleni.
[11] For the purposes of the market concentration assessment, the Commission relied on the market share estimates of the merging
parties since there are limited available data. The Commission also contacted competitors of the merging parties to ascertain their views on the size of the market(s) and the competitive climate.
[12] The Tribunal questioned the Commission and the merging parties regarding the scope of the geographic market and the estimation of market shares. The merging parties indicated that they used a geographic radius of approximately eight kilometres to estimate
their combined market share in each affected
geographic area.[1] Based on this, the merging parties have a combined market
share of less than 10% in the market for the provision of rentable space in affordable housing property in each affected geographic area.
[13] We take no view in this case on the exact scope of the relevant geographic market and note that lndluplace Properties is acquiring
only a single property from Dilucuto Properties in each of the following areas: Pretoria CBD, Centurion, Kempton Park, Germiston,
Pretoria West and Bloemfontein; and is acquiring two properties, Jozi House and Frederick House, in the Johannesburg CBD. There appears to be a small market share increment in each market as a result of the proposed transaction and, furthermore, sufficient alternative rentable affordable housing property in each affected geographic area post-merger.
[14] We concur with the Commission's ultimate conclusion that the proposed transaction is unlikely to substantially prevent or lessen
competition in any relevant market.
PUBLIC
INTEREST
[15] The merging parties confirmed that the proposed transaction will have no adverse effect on employment. In particular, there will be no retrenchments or job losses as a result of the proposed transaction.[2]
[16] Furthermore, the proposed transaction raises no other public interest concerns.
CONCLUSION
[17] In light of the above, we conclude that the proposed transaction is unlikely to substantially prevent or lessen competition in any relevant market. In addition, no other public interest issues arise as a result of the proposed transaction. Accordingly, we approve the proposed transaction unconditionally.
26 June 2017
Date
_______
Mr AW Wessels
Ms M Mazwai and Prof. I Valodia concurring
Tribunal Researcher : Mr Ndumiso Ndlovu
For the merging parties : Ms Vani Chetty of Baker McKenzie Attorneys
For the Commission : Ms Zanele Hadebe
[1] Transcript, pages 3 to 5;
[2] Merger Record, pages 9 and 82.
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.