Download PDF

South Africa Judgment

Competition Tribunal

Public Investment Corporation Limited and Another v Sub-Sahara Industrial Holdings (Pty) Ltd (LM096Sep16) [2016] ZACT 95 (26 October 2016)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The Tribunal found that the proposed transaction would not result in a substantial lessening or prevention of competition in any relevant market, as there was no overlap between the activities of the acquiring and target firms. The potential overlap arising from GEPF's interest in RTT Holdings was deemed irrelevant, as RTT provides courier services distinct from SSIH's infrastructure logistics services. The Tribunal also accepted the merging parties' confirmation that the transaction would not adversely affect employment and raised no other public interest concerns. Accordingly, the Tribunal approved the merger unconditionally.

Court disposition

Merger unconditionally approved.

Orders

  • The merger between Public Investment Corporation Limited, Business Venture Investments No 1963 (RF) (Pty) Ltd, and Sub-Sahara Industrial Holdings (Pty) Ltd is unconditionally approved.

02

Material facts

Parties

Public Investment Corporation Limited

Applicant Counsel: Albert Aukema

Business Venture Investments No 1963 (RF) (Pty) Ltd

Applicant Counsel: Albert Aukema

Sub-Sahara Industrial Holdings (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Merger Control / Merger Approval

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The applicants argued that the transaction would facilitate transformation in a critical infrastructure sub-sector and enable investment in a leading infrastructure services company. They further submitted that the transaction would assist the target firm in improving its B-BBEE scores to qualify for government contracts. The merging parties confirmed that there would be no adverse impact on employment and no other public interest concerns.
Respondent
The respondent, Sub-Sahara Industrial Holdings, supported the transaction as a means to upgrade its B-BBEE scores and become eligible for government contracts. The Competition Commission found no overlap between the target and acquiring firms and concluded that the transaction would not result in a substantial lessening of competition. The Commission also found no evidence of adverse public interest effects, including on employment.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 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.

  2. 02

    Competition Act 89 of 1998

    Public interest factors, including employment and B-BBEE compliance, must be considered in merger assessments.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The Tribunal found that the proposed transaction would not result in a substantial lessening or prevention of competition in any relevant market, as there was no overlap between the activities of the acquiring and target firms. The potential overlap arising from GEPF's interest in RTT Holdings was deemed irrelevant, as RTT provides courier services distinct from SSIH's infrastructure logistics services. The Tribunal also accepted the merging parties' confirmation that the transaction would not adversely affect employment and raised no other public interest concerns. Accordingly, the Tribunal approved the merger unconditionally.

Obiter and limits

  • The Tribunal noted that the transaction would assist the target firm in improving its B-BBEE scores, thereby enhancing its eligibility for government contracts.
  • The Tribunal concurred with the Competition Commission's assessment that no competition concerns arose from the transaction.

Court disposition

Merger unconditionally approved.

  • The merger between Public Investment Corporation Limited, Business Venture Investments No 1963 (RF) (Pty) Ltd, and Sub-Sahara Industrial Holdings (Pty) Ltd is unconditionally approved.

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.

Source document

Competition Tribunal

Judgment

[2016] ZACT 95

COMPETITION

TRIBUNAL OF SOUTH AFRICA

Case No: LM096Sep16

In the matter between:

Public Investment Corporation Limited

Business Venture Investments No 1963 (RF) (Pty) Ltd Primary Acquiring Firms

and

Sub-Sahara Industrial Holdings (Pty) Ltd

Primary Target Firm

Panel

: Norman Manoim (Presiding Member)

: Anton Roskam (Tribunal Member)

: Mondo Mazwai (Tribunal Member)

Heard on

: 30 September 2016

Order Issued on

: 30 September 2016

Reasons Issued on : 26 October 2016

Reasons for Decision

Approval

[ 1] On 30 September 2016, the Competition Tribunal ("Tribunal") unconditionally approved the merger between the acquiring firms Public Investment Corporation Limited ("PIC") and Business Venture Investments no 1963 ("Business Venture") and the target firm Sub-Saharan Industrial Holdings ("SSIH").

[ 2 ] The reasons for approving the proposed transaction follow.

Parties to transaction

Primary acquiring firm

[ 3 ] The primary acqu1nng firms, PIC is the duly authorized representative of the Government Employees Pension Fund ("GEPF") and is controlled by the South African Government. The primary acquiring firm, Business Venture is jointly controlled by Banzi Trade and Invest 17 (Pty) Ltd ( “Banzi Trade") and PIC. Banzi Trade is in turn controlled by the Protus Sokhela Trust

[ 4 ] PIC is an asset management firm which provides asset management services to its clients. Its role is to invest funds on behalf of its clients in accordance with their investment mandates .For the purposes of this transaction, PIC Is acting on behalf of the GEPF which is a juristic person responsible for the management and administration of government employee pensions in South Africa. GEPF has an interest in RTT Holdings which is a transport and logistics company. Business Venture is a private company which has no assets or turnover. One of its shareholders, Banzi Trade is a property investment company which owns commercial property.

Primary target firm

[ 5 ] The primary target firm, SSIH is a holding company which has interests in infrastructure related businesses primarily in the road and rail sectors which includes the provision of transport and logistics as well as the supply and application of road surfacing products.

Proposed transaction and rationale

[ 6 ] The proposed transaction involves PIC and Business Venture acquiring SSIH which would result in the Protus Sokhela Trust and the PIC exercising joint control over SSIH post- transaction.

[ 7 ] PIC submits that the proposed transaction represents an opportunity to facilitate the transformation of an industry sub-sector which is critical to the growth and integration of the South African region. Banzi Trade submits that the transaction is an opportunity to invest in a leading infrastructure services company. SSIH submits that the proposed transaction is in order to upgrade its B-BBEE scores in order to become eligible for government contracts.

Impact on competition

[ 8 ] According to the Competition Commission's ("the Commission") findings the proposed transaction does not result in a substantial lessening of competition in any market. This is based on the fact that the Commission found that there was no overlap present between the target and acquiring firms. They note that the potential overlap arising from GEPF's interest in RTT Holdings is not relevant to the proposed transaction as RT offers courier services by road transportation which is distinct from SSlH which offers logistics services to infrastructure related businesses.

[ 9 ] In the absence of any evidence to the contrary we concur with the Commission's competition assessment, i.e. that the proposed transaction is unlikely to substantially prevent or lessen competition as there is no overlap present.

Public interest

[ 10 ] The merging parties confirmed that the proposed transaction will not result in an adverse impact on employment.[1] The proposed transaction further raises no other public interest concerns.

Conclusion

[ 11 ] 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 public interest issues arise from the proposed transaction. Accordingly, we approve the proposed transaction unconditionally

26 October 2016

DATE

_____

Mr Norman Manoim

Ms Mondo Mazwai and Mr Anton Roskam concurring

Tribunal Researcher: Aneesa Ravat

For the merging parties: Albert Aukema of Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr Inc

For the Commission: Zintle Siyo and Xolela Nokela

[1] Inter alia merger record page 7.

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

Competition Act 89 of 1998

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

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.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.