PSG Investment Bank Holdings Ltd and Real Africa Durolink Holdings Ltd (31/LM/May01) [2001] ZACT 27 (17 July 2001)
- Citation
- [2001] ZACT 27
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Court
- Competition Tribunal
- Panel
- D.H. Lewis, S. Zilwa, D. Terblanche
- Case number
- 31/LM/May01
More details
- Court
- Competition Tribunal
- Panel
- D.H. Lewis, S. Zilwa, D. Terblanche
- Case number
- 31/LM/May01
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The Tribunal found that the combined market share of the merged entity in all relevant product markets would be less than 15%, and the increase in market concentration (HHI) would be less than 50 points. The banking and financial services sector is broad, with the five largest banks accounting for 95% of the treasury services market, leaving the merged entity to compete for the remaining 5%. The Tribunal concluded that competition would not be substantially prevented or lessened by the merger. Public interest considerations, including the ability of small banks to grow, black economic empowerment, and the avoidance of negative ripple effects from RAD's potential exit, further supported approval. The Tribunal approved the merger without conditions.
Court disposition
Merger approved without conditions.
Orders
- The merger between PSG Investment Bank Holdings Ltd and Real Africa Durolink Holdings Ltd is approved without conditions.
- A Merger Clearance Certificate is issued.
02
Material facts
Parties
PSG Investment Bank Holdings Ltd
ApplicantReal Africa Durolink Holdings Ltd
RespondentAmounts and remedies
- Combined Market Share of Merged Entity: ZAR 15
- Increase in HHI After Merger: ZAR 50
03
Procedural history
Posture
Large Merger / Merger Approval
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the proposed merger between PSG Investment Bank Holdings Ltd and Real Africa Durolink Holdings Ltd will substantially prevent or lessen competition in the relevant markets.
- 02
Whether there are any public interest grounds that justify or oppose the merger.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicants argued that the merger would allow them to achieve the critical mass necessary to compete with larger banks, restore confidence after the demise of small banks, and strengthen their capital base and credit ratings. They also contended that the merger would prevent adverse effects on investor confidence and industry stability due to RAD's recent trading losses, and that smaller banks serve clients who require personal attention.
- Respondent
- The respondent, Real Africa Durolink Holdings Ltd, supported the merger, emphasizing the need for consolidation among smaller banks to remain competitive and protect their deposit base. The respondent also highlighted the presence of black economic empowerment components and the importance of maintaining smaller banks in the market. The Commission supported the transaction and indicated that employment effects would be assessed after due diligence.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Competition Act, 89 of 1998
A merger may not be approved if it substantially prevents or lessens competition in any relevant market, unless justified on public interest grounds.
- 02
Competition Commission Report to the South African Reserve Bank on the Nedcor/Stanbic merger (14 April 2000)
Market share and concentration indices such as HHI are relevant in assessing the competitive impact of a merger.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The Tribunal found that the combined market share of the merged entity in all relevant product markets would be less than 15%, and the increase in market concentration (HHI) would be less than 50 points. The banking and financial services sector is broad, with the five largest banks accounting for 95% of the treasury services market, leaving the merged entity to compete for the remaining 5%. The Tribunal concluded that competition would not be substantially prevented or lessened by the merger. Public interest considerations, including the ability of small banks to grow, black economic empowerment, and the avoidance of negative ripple effects from RAD's potential exit, further supported approval. The Tribunal approved the merger without conditions.
Obiter and limits
- The Tribunal noted that smaller banks provide personal attention to clients and should remain in the market.
- The effect of the merger on employment will be assessed once the parties complete their due diligence investigation.
Court disposition
Merger approved without conditions.
- The merger between PSG Investment Bank Holdings Ltd and Real Africa Durolink Holdings Ltd is approved without conditions.
- A Merger Clearance Certificate is issued.
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
REPUBLIC
OF SOUTH AFRICA
Case No: 31/LM/May01
In the large merger between:
PSG Investment Bank Holdings Ltd
and
Real Africa Durolink Holdings Ltd
REASONS FOR THE TRIBUNALâS DECISION
Approval
The Competition Tribunal issued a Merger Clearance Certificate on 21 June 2001 approving the merger between PSG Investment Bank Holdings Ltd and Real Africa Durolink Holdings Ltd without conditions. The reasons for approving the merger are set out below.
The merger transaction
PSG will purchase 100% of the shares in Real Africa Durolink Holdings Ltd (âRADâ) after which RAD will become a wholly owned subsidiary of PSG. It will be delisted from the JSE.
The parties allege that the proposed transaction presents the opportunity to achieve the critical mass required to become more competitive. They explain that in order to compete with larger banks and to restore confidence after the demise of small banks such as New Republic Bank, smaller players need to gain an adequate capital base and increase efficiencies. This has placed pressure on the smaller players to consolidate and to strengthen their credit ratings and to protect their deposit base.
Evaluating the merger
The relevant market
The Commission has identified the following product markets in which there is product overlap between the merging parties: Corporate Finance, Investment Banking/Proprietary Investment, Structured Finance, Treasury, Asset Management and Stock Broking Services. These services are rendered on a national basis.
Impact on competition
The Banking and financial services sector is a broad market with a substantial number of players. According to the 1999 Banking Survey the players in South Africa can be divided into three groups:
The large South African commercial banks such as ABSA, Nedcor, First Rand and Stanbic and in respect of corporate, investment and merchant banking services BOE and Investec. Foreign controlled entities or branches of foreign banks such as Citibank, Deutsche Bank and JP Morgan. The second tier of smaller niche banks and financial service providers into which category both PSG and RAD fall.
According to the figures quoted in the Competition Commission Report to the South African Reserve Bank on the Nedcor/Stanbic merger of 14 April 2000, the five largest banks, i.e. category 1) mentioned above, account for 95% of the treasury services market with the remainder of the banks, including the new entity, competing for 5% of the market.
The Commission has indicated that the combined market share of the merged entity in respect of all the relevant product markets would be less than 15% and the increase in concentration, i.e. the change in the HHI after the merger, will be less than 50 points.
We, therefore, find that competition will not be substantially prevented or lessened.
Public interest consideration
Although the Commission had not in its recommendation determined whether the merger could be justified on any public interest grounds, it did indicate at the hearing that it had considered the ability of the small banks to grow and to become competitive, as well as the fact that smaller banks have black economic empowerment components. For these reasons it supports the transaction.
The parties added to this the fact that RAD had recently suffered substantial trading losses, which would cause a ripple effect in various industries as well as adversely affect investor confidence should the bank exit the market. The parties also said that smaller banks serviced the needs of clients that want personal attention and should, therefore, remain in the market.
With regard to the effect of the merger on employment the Commission indicated that the parties will provide it with the necessary information as soon as they have completed a due diligence investigation.
17 July 2001
D.H. Lewis
Concurring: S. Zilwa and D. Terblanche
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.