Respublica Student Living (Pty) Ltd v Midrand Varsity Lodge (Pty) Ltd and Others (LM245Mar16) [2016] ZACT 34 (22 April 2016)

Respublica Student Living (Pty) Ltd v Midrand Varsity Lodge (Pty) Ltd and Others (LM245Mar16) [2016] ZACT 34 (22 April 2016)

The Tribunal found that although there is a horizontal overlap in the provision of rentable residential properties for student accommodation, the merging parties' properties are located between 24 and 39 kilometers apart. This distance means there is no geographic overlap, and the properties cannot be considered...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2016] ZACT 34
Parties
Applicant: Respublica Student Living (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Midrand Varsity Lodge (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Masingita Estates (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Sam King Investment Holdings (Pty) Ltd
Court
Competition Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
22 April 2016
Case Number
LM245Mar16
Procedural Posture
Merger Approval / Final Determination
Outcome
Merger approved unconditionally.
Judges
Y Carrim, A Ndoni, A Roskam
Legal Topics
Merger Control, Horizontal Overlap, Public Interest, Student Accommodation Market
Competition Law Merger Control Horizontal Overlap Public Interest Student Accommodation Market

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Respublica Student Living (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Midrand Varsity Lodge (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Masingita Estates (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Sam King Investment Holdings (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Merger Approval / Final Determination

  1. 1 Whether the proposed merger would substantially prevent or lessen competition in the market for rentable residential properties used for student accommodation.
  2. 2 Whether the merger raises any significant public interest concerns, including adverse effects on employment.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that although there is a horizontal overlap in the provision of rentable residential properties for student accommodation, the merging parties' properties are located between 24 and 39 kilometers apart. This distance means there is no geographic overlap, and the properties cannot be considered substitutes. The Commission concluded, and the Tribunal agreed, that the merger is unlikely to substantially prevent or lessen competition in the relevant market. Furthermore, the merger raises no significant public interest concerns, as there will be no adverse effect on employment or retrenchments. The transaction was therefore approved unconditionally.

Court Disposition

Merger approved unconditionally.

Orders

  • The proposed transaction is approved unconditionally.