Sasol Chemical Industries (Pty) Ltd v Competition Commission and Others; Competition Commission of South Africa v Sasol Chemical Industries (Pty) Ltd and Others (45/CR/May06) [2008] ZACT 43; [2008] 2 CPLR 351 (CT) (2 June 2008)

Sasol Chemical Industries (Pty) Ltd v Competition Commission and Others; Competition Commission of South Africa v Sasol Chemical Industries (Pty) Ltd and Others (45/CR/May06) [2008] ZACT 43; [2008] 2 CPLR 351 (CT) (2 June 2008)

The Tribunal held that it does not possess the statutory power to grant a dismissal of a complaint referral prior to trial, as such a remedy is not expressly provided for in the Competition Act and cannot be inferred from section 27(1)(d). The Tribunal is a creature of statute and lacks inherent jurisdiction to grant draconian remedies. Even if such power existed, the conduct of Profert and the Commission did not meet the stringent threshold required for dismissal, as there was no actual, trial-related prejudice to Sasol. Profert is not a party to the proceedings and cannot be mulcted with costs for postponement. The appropriate remedy for any inconvenience suffered by Sasol is to proceed...

Citation
[2008] ZACT 43
Parties
Applicant: Sasol Chemical Industries (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Competition Commission; Respondent: Yara (South Africa) (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: African Explosives and Chemical Industries Ltd; Respondent: Profert (Pty) Ltd
Court
Competition Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
2 June 2008
Case Number
45/CR/May06
Procedural Posture
Dismissal Application / Application for Dismissal and Costs Following Interlocutory Proceedings
Outcome
Application for dismissal and costs is dismissed.
Judges
D Lewis, Y Carrim, U Bhoola
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Jurisdiction of Tribunal, Costs Award, Statutory Powers, Party Status
Competition Law Civil Procedure Abuse of Process Jurisdiction of Tribunal Costs Award Statutory Powers Party Status

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sasol Chemical Industries (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Competition Commission

Respondent

Yara (South Africa) (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

African Explosives and Chemical Industries Ltd

Respondent

Profert (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Dismissal Application / Application for Dismissal and Costs Following Interlocutory Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Competition Tribunal has the statutory power to grant a dismissal of a complaint referral prior to trial.
  2. 2 Whether the conduct of Profert and/or the Competition Commission justifies a dismissal of the complaint referral.
  3. 3 Whether costs for postponement can be awarded against Profert, a non-party to the proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal held that it does not possess the statutory power to grant a dismissal of a complaint referral prior to trial, as such a remedy is not expressly provided for in the Competition Act and cannot be inferred from section 27(1)(d). The Tribunal is a creature of statute and lacks inherent jurisdiction to grant draconian remedies. Even if such power existed, the conduct of Profert and the Commission did not meet the stringent threshold required for dismissal, as there was no actual, trial-related prejudice to Sasol. Profert is not a party to the proceedings and cannot be mulcted with costs for postponement. The appropriate remedy for any inconvenience suffered by Sasol is to proceed...

Court Disposition

Application for dismissal and costs is dismissed.

Orders

  • Sasol's application for dismissal of the complaint referral is refused.
  • Sasol's application for costs against Profert and the Commission is refused.