Shiselweni Forestry Company Ltd v Peak Timbers Ltd and Another (LM120Sep20) [2021] ZACT 13 (6 April 2021)
- Citation
- [2021] ZACT 13
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Court
- Competition Tribunal
- Panel
- M Mazwai, A Wessels, T Vilakazi
- Case number
- LM120Sep20
More details
- Court
- Competition Tribunal
- Panel
- M Mazwai, A Wessels, T Vilakazi
- Case number
- LM120Sep20
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The Tribunal found that the proposed merger between Shiselweni Forestry Company Ltd and the businesses of Peak Timbers Ltd and Peak Forest Products (Pty) Ltd would not result in a substantial prevention or lessening of competition in the relevant timber markets. The Tribunal accepted the Competition Commission's findings that, although there were horizontal and vertical overlaps, the merged entity's market shares were not sufficient to confer market power in most markets. The main theory of harm related to input foreclosure, specifically the risk that the merged entity might divert supplies of untreated transmission poles and mining timber away from third-party customers to its own downstream operations. To address these concerns, the Tribunal imposed a set of behavioral conditions requiring the merged entity to continue supplying existing customers on commercial terms and industry norms, maintain existing price structures for pulp logs, and report annually to the Commission on compliance. The Tribunal was satisfied that these conditions would assuage foreclosure concerns and ensure continued competition. No public interest concerns were identified in South Africa, as the target firms are based in eSwatini and employees would be transferred accordingly. The merger was approved subject to the attached conditions.
Court disposition
Merger conditionally approved subject to behavioral remedies.
Orders
- The merger is approved subject to the conditions set out in Annexure A.
- The merged entity must publish a non-confidential version of the conditions on its website within five days of implementation and provide them to existing customers within 14 days of approval.
- The merged entity must continue to supply mining timber, untreated transmission poles, untreated building and fencing poles, treated building and fencing poles, pulp logs, and saw logs to existing customers on commercial terms and industry norms for specified periods.
- The merged entity must maintain existing price structures for pulp logs and negotiate any price increases in good faith with customers.
- The merged entity must report annually to the Competition Commission on compliance with the supply conditions and provide detailed explanations for any shortfalls.
- Any breach of the conditions will be dealt with in terms of the Rules for the Conduct of Proceedings in the Commission and Tribunal.
- The merging parties and/or the Commission may apply to the Tribunal for variation of the conditions on good cause shown.
02
Material facts
Parties
Shiselweni Forestry Company Ltd
Applicant Counsel: Marianne Wagener and Julia Sham-GuildPeak Timbers Ltd
Respondent Counsel: Paul CoetserPeak Forest Products (Pty) Ltd
Respondent Counsel: Paul CoetserAmounts and remedies
- Merged Entity Market Share (untreated Transmission Poles): 27.5
- Merged Entity Market Share (mining Timber, Not Sawn and Untreated): 32.5
- Merged Entity Market Share (pulp Logs): 22.5
03
Procedural history
Posture
Large Merger / Conditional Approval
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the proposed merger would result in a substantial prevention or lessening of competition in the relevant timber markets.
- 02
Whether the merger would create input foreclosure effects for downstream customers of timber products.
- 03
Whether the imposed conditions adequately address competition and public interest concerns.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The acquiring firm argued that the merger would not result in any substantial prevention or lessening of competition, as the combined market shares in the relevant timber product markets remain moderate and there are sufficient competitors. The applicant submitted that the merger would not raise public interest concerns in South Africa, as the target firms are based in eSwatini and employees would be transferred accordingly. The applicant tendered supply conditions to address customer concerns regarding input foreclosure.
- Respondent
- The target firms, represented by their advocate, supported the merger and agreed to the proposed supply conditions to mitigate any potential foreclosure effects. They argued that the merger would not harm competition, as the merged entity would continue to supply existing customers on commercial terms and industry norms. The respondent accepted the behavioral remedies proposed by the Commission and confirmed that no public interest concerns would arise.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Competition Act No. 89 of 1998
A merger may be approved subject to conditions if it is unlikely to result in a substantial prevention or lessening of competition, provided that any identified foreclosure concerns are adequately addressed.
- 02
Competition Tribunal Guidelines on Merger Remedies
Behavioral remedies, such as supply conditions and reporting obligations, may be imposed to ensure continued access to essential inputs for downstream competitors and customers.
- 03
Merger record, page 776
The assessment of market power and foreclosure effects requires analysis of post-merger market shares, competitive constraints, and the ability and incentive to foreclose rivals.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The Tribunal found that the proposed merger between Shiselweni Forestry Company Ltd and the businesses of Peak Timbers Ltd and Peak Forest Products (Pty) Ltd would not result in a substantial prevention or lessening of competition in the relevant timber markets. The Tribunal accepted the Competition Commission's findings that, although there were horizontal and vertical overlaps, the merged entity's market shares were not sufficient to confer market power in most markets. The main theory of harm related to input foreclosure, specifically the risk that the merged entity might divert supplies of untreated transmission poles and mining timber away from third-party customers to its own downstream operations. To address these concerns, the Tribunal imposed a set of behavioral conditions requiring the merged entity to continue supplying existing customers on commercial terms and industry norms, maintain existing price structures for pulp logs, and report annually to the Commission on compliance. The Tribunal was satisfied that these conditions would assuage foreclosure concerns and ensure continued competition. No public interest concerns were identified in South Africa, as the target firms are based in eSwatini and employees would be transferred accordingly. The merger was approved subject to the attached conditions.
Obiter and limits
- The Tribunal noted that the behavioral remedies imposed are designed to ensure security of supply for affected customers and to facilitate the transition to alternative suppliers if necessary.
- The Tribunal emphasized the importance of monitoring compliance with the conditions and reporting obligations to the Commission to safeguard competition in the affected markets.
- The Tribunal observed that the merger raised no employment or other public interest concerns in South Africa, as the target firms operate in eSwatini.
Court disposition
Merger conditionally approved subject to behavioral remedies.
- The merger is approved subject to the conditions set out in Annexure A.
- The merged entity must publish a non-confidential version of the conditions on its website within five days of implementation and provide them to existing customers within 14 days of approval.
- The merged entity must continue to supply mining timber, untreated transmission poles, untreated building and fencing poles, treated building and fencing poles, pulp logs, and saw logs to existing customers on commercial terms and industry norms for specified periods.
- The merged entity must maintain existing price structures for pulp logs and negotiate any price increases in good faith with customers.
- The merged entity must report annually to the Competition Commission on compliance with the supply conditions and provide detailed explanations for any shortfalls.
- Any breach of the conditions will be dealt with in terms of the Rules for the Conduct of Proceedings in the Commission and Tribunal.
- The merging parties and/or the Commission may apply to the Tribunal for variation of the conditions on good cause shown.
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: LM120Sep20
In the matter between:
SHISELWENI
FORESTRY COMPANY LTD Acquiring Firm
and
PEAK
TIMBERS LTD AND
PEAK FOREST PRODUCTS (PTY) LTD Target Firms
Panel : Ms M Mazwai (Presiding Member)
: Mr A Wessels (Tribunal Member)
: Dr T Vilakazi (Tribunal Member)
Heard on : 17 February 2021
Date of last submission : 19 February 2021
Order issued on : 24 February 2021
Reasons issued on : 06 April 2021
REASONS
FOR DECISION
CONDITIONAL
APPROVAL
[1] On 24 February 2021, the Competition Tribunal (âTribunalâ) conditionally approved the proposed transaction in terms of which Shiselweni Forestry Company Ltd (âSFCâ) acquired the businesses of Peak Timbers Ltd (âPeak Timbersâ) and Peak Forest Products (Pty) Ltd (âPFPâ).
[2] The reasons for the conditional approval of the proposed transaction follow.
Parties to the transaction and their activities
[3] The primary acquiring firm is SFC, a company incorporated in eSwatini. SFC is wholly owned by TWK Investments Limited (âTWKâ), a South African incorporated company which is ultimately controlled by TWK Agricultural Holdings (Pty) Ltd (âTWK Agricultureâ).[1] TWK Agriculture also controls Bedrock (Pty) Ltd (âBedrockâ). TWK Agriculture and its subsidiaries are hereinafter collectively referred to as the âTWK groupâ.
[4] The business activities of the TWK group comprise of the supply of agricultural and related services, and the provision of products including timber, grain, trade, mechanisation, financing, insurance, vehicles, and tyres. TWK groupâs plantations in eSwatini include wattle, eucalyptus, and pine.
[5] Relevant to this transaction is TWK groupâs timber division which supplies untreated transmission poles; treated transmission poles (supplied only in eSwatini); untreated building and fencing poles; treated building and fencing poles; untreated mining timber logs (not sawn); mining timber logs; pulp logs; and woodchips. TWK group supplies their treated building and fencing poles to customers in South Africa.
[6] The primary target firms are the businesses of Peak Timbers and PFP. Peak Timbers and PFP are ultimately controlled by Criterion Africa Partners (Pty) Ltd.
[7] Peak Timbers is active in the planting, harvesting, processing and sale of timber and timber related products. Peak Timbers supplies hardwood saw logs; mining timber logs; pulpwood; untreated transmission pole logs; and untreated building and fencing pole logs.
[8] PFP operates a sawmill and supplies mining timber products and woodchips. The target firms are based in eSwatini and supply their products to customers in South Africa.
Proposed transaction
[9] SFC intends to acquire the businesses of Peak Timbers and PFP as going concerns. Post-merger, SFC will control the target firms.
Relevant market and impact on competition
Horizontal assessment
[10] The Competition Commission (âCommissionâ) found several horizontal overlaps in the activities of the merging parties as they are active in the supply of untreated transmission poles; untreated building and fencing poles; untreated and unsawn mining timber; pulp logs; and woodchip.
[11] Based on the merged entityâs market share accretions (of between 1-5% respectively), the Commission concluded that the proposed transaction is unlikely to result in unilateral effects in the following markets: (i) the upstream market for the supply of untreated building and fencing poles in Mpumalanga and Northern KZN regions; and (ii) the downstream market for the supply of woodchips. In the upstream market for the supply of untreated building and fencing poles in Mpumalanga and Northern KZN regions, the merged entity will continue to compete with various players active in the market, where the largest player has a market share of over 40%. Similarly, in the downstream market for the supply of woodchips, the merged entity will continue to face competition from several firms, such as Montigny, Timrite and Paulpietersburg.
[12] In the upstream market for the supply of the untreated transmission poles in Mpumalanga and Northern KZN regions, the Commission considered the merging partiesâ post-merger market share of between 25-30% and found that the proposed transaction is unlikely to result in unilateral effects as the merging parties are not necessarily competitors, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX [REDACTED]
[13] In the upstream market for the supply of mining timber (not sawn and untreated), where the merging partiesâ post-merger market share is between 30-35%, the Commission concluded that any unilateral effects likely to result therefrom relate to input foreclosure effects and as such, the Commission considered this market under the vertical assessment.
[14] In the upstream market for the supply of pulp logs in the Mpumalanga and KZN regions, where the merging partiesâ post-merger market share is between 20- 25%, the Commission considered the question of whether the merging parties will face a real competitive constraint in the market post-merger; and whether the merging parties will have the ability to increase prices to its customers. The Commission found that the merging partiesâ competitors are unlikely to be able to constrain the merged entity and based on a concern expressed by a customer, the merged entity may have the ability to increase the price of pulp logs post- merger.[2] A supply condition to address this concern was imposed.
Vertical assessment
[15] The Commission identified vertical overlaps between: (i) the target firms as suppliers of untreated transmission poles and the TWK group as a downstream player in the supply of treated transmission poles; (ii) the target firms as suppliers of untreated building and fencing poles and the TWK group as a downstream player in the supply of treated building and fencing poles; and (iii) the target firms as suppliers of untreated mining timber and the TWK group (through Bedrock) as a downstream player in the supply of treated mining timber (final product).
Vertical overlap between the target firms as suppliers of untreated transmission poles and the TWK group as a downstream player in the supply of treated transmission poles
[16] The Commission considered whether the proposed transaction may present an ability and incentive by the merged entity to foreclose downstream customers of untreated transmission poles. The Commission found that there may be an ability and incentive to foreclose downstream customers in that the merged entity will be vertically integrated and may not supply untreated transmission poles to the open-market post-merger. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX [REDACTED]
[17] However, the Commission found that the merged entityâs market share of between 25-30% is unlikely to put the latter in a position of market power in this upstream market to confer it with the ability to significantly foreclose access to untreated transmission poles. The merged entity may, nonetheless, have the incentive to divert untreated transmission poles from the target firms for its own downstream production of treated transmission poles. Therefore, it is likely that the target firmsâ customers will be significantly impacted should the target firms stop supplying to these customers post-merger.
[18] Further, the Commission received concerns from customers pertaining to input foreclosure. In sum, a specific customer was concerned that should the merged entity divert untreated transmission poles towards its internal operations then this would negatively impact the customer because switching to alternative suppliers would increase its transportation costs. The merger parties tendered a supply condition that will endure long enough to enable the customer to rearrange its source of supply and also identify alternative suppliers. The customer was satisfied with the proposed remedy.
[19] The Commission found no customer foreclosure concerns, as the TWK group currently procures significant volumes of untreated transmission poles from its own shareholders and not from third party suppliers.
Vertical overlap between the target firms as suppliers of untreated building and fencing poles and the TWK group as a downstream player in the supply of treated building and fencing poles
[20] The Commission found no input or customer foreclosure concerns as the merged entityâs post-merger market share is low and neither the TWK group nor the target firms procure untreated building and fencing poles from third parties.
Vertical overlap between the target firms as suppliers of untreated mining timber and the TWK group (through Bedrock) as a downstream player in the supply of treated mining timber (final product)
[21] Owing to the distance between Bedrock and the target firms, as well as the high costs of transporting timber over a long distance, the Commission found that the merger partiesâ ability and incentive to divert all its mining timber to the TWK group is constrained.
[22] However, a customer of the target firms which is also a downstream competitor of BedRock,[3] raised a concern that the merger parties may divert mining timber supplied by the target firms to third party customers towards TWK groupâs internal operations to the detriment of downstream rivals. As a result, the Commission found that this customer is likely to be foreclosed should the merger parties stop supplying to third party customers.
[23] The Commission further found that the TWK group may stop or reduce its procurement of mining timber (not sawn and untreated) from small suppliers, as it will have access to the target firmsâ products.
Conclusion on the vertical assessment
[24] Based on the above, the main theory of harm emanating from the Commissionâs findings and the concerns expressed by third parties is that of input foreclosure, namely that post-merger (i) the merger parties will stop supplying untreated transmission poles to customers and as such foreclose these firms; and (ii) the merger parties will stop supplying untreated mining timber from customers, resulting in the foreclosure of these firms.
[25] To address the above-mentioned foreclosure concerns, the Commission and the merger parties proposed a set of behavioral remedies. The Tribunal directed the Commission to canvass the conditions with the various customers.
[26] Considering the concerns raised by some of the customers and after testing the proposed revised conditions, the Tribunal imposed conditions which will ensure, inter alia, the following:
26.1. Security of supply for a large customer of the TWK group in respect of mining timber (untreated and unsawn) for a further XXXXXXXXXXXXXX [REDACTED]
26.2. Negotiations (in good faith) by the TWK group with the target firmsâ existing customers (as named in the confidential conditions), with the aim of entering into a supply agreement in respect of mining timber (untreated and unsawn), untreated transmission poles, untreated and treated building and fencing poles and pulp logs, for a period of
and based on Commercial Terms and Industry Norms.
26.3. The continuation, by the TWK group, through BedRock, of the purchase of mining timber (final product) from third party mills on a spot basis for a period of XXXXXX [REDACTED]
26.4. The continuation of existing price structures, by the TWK group, with the target firmsâ existing customers (as named in the confidential conditions) for pulp logs and negotiations (in good faith) on any price increases for the duration of the supply agreements.
[27] Therefore, the Tribunal was satisfied that the imposed conditions assuage the input foreclosure concerns and as such, it is unlikely that the proposed transaction will result in a substantial prevention or lessening of competition in the relevant markets.
Public interest
[28] With regards to employment, the merging parties submitted that the proposed transaction does not raise any public interest concerns in South Africa as the target firms are based in eSwatini. Notwithstanding, the employees in eSwatini will be transferred to SFCâs operations in eSwatini.
[29] Further, the Commission was satisfied that the proposed transaction raised no other public interest concerns. We found no reason to disagree with the Commissionâs findings.
Conclusion
[30] In light of the above, the proposed transaction was approved subject to the conditions attached hereunder as "Annexure A".
06 April 2021
Ms Mondo Mazwai Date
Mr AW Wessels and Dr T Vilakazi concurring.
Tribunal case managers :Duduetsang Mogapi and Kgothatso Kgobe.
For the merging parties :Marianne Wagener and Julia Sham-Guild of Norton Rose Fulbright Attorneys for the acquiring firm.
:Paul Coetser of Werksmans Attorneys for the target firms.
For the Commission ::Raksha Darji and Themba Mahlangu
NON-CONFIDENTIAL
ANNEXURE
A
IN
THE LARGE MERGER BETWEEN
SHISELWENI FORESTRY COMPANY LIMITED (TWK)
AND
PEAK TIMBERS LIMITED AND PEAK FOREST PRODUCTS (PTY) LTD
TRIBUNAL CASE NUMBER: LM120Sep20
CONDITIONS
1.
DEFINITIONS
The following expressions shall bear the meanings assigned to them below and cognate expressions bear corresponding meanings:
1.1. âAcquiring Firm" or âSFCâ means Shiselweni Forestry Company Limited, a private company registered and incorporated in accordance with the company laws of eSwatini;
1.2. "Approval Date" means the date referred to in the Competition Tribunalâs merger clearance certificate (Notice CT10);
1.3. [confidential];
1.4. [confidential];
1.5. âBedRockâ means BedRock Mining Support (Pty) Ltd, a subsidiary of TWK;
1.6. [confidential];
1.7. "Commission" means the Competition Commission of South Africa;
1.8. "Competition Act" means the Competition Act No. 89 of 1998, as amended;
1.9. âCommercial Termsâ mean terms that are commercially reasonable and non-discriminatory terms, which are fair armâs length terms, similar in nature to those that direct customers of the Merged Entity would enter into in the normal course of business. The conditions of supply are to be consistent with Industry Norms.
1.10. "Conditions" mean these conditions contained in this Annexure âAâ;
1.11. âDaysâ mean business days, being any day other than a Saturday, Sunday or official public holiday in the Republic of South Africa;
1.12. âExisting Agreementâ means the agreement between [confidential] and Peak entered into on [confidential]for the supply of Mining Timber (not sawn and untreated), which TWK will continue until the end of the agreement in [confidential];
1.13. âExtended Supply Periodâ means the period following the end of the Existing Agreement in terms of which TWK will negotiate a supply agreement for the supply of Mining Timber (not sawn and untreated) between it and [confidential] for a further [confidential] until the end of [confidential];
1.14. [confidential];
1.15. [confidential];
1.16. âImplementation Dateâ means the date, occurring after the Approval Date, on which the proposed transaction is implemented by the Merging Parties;
1.17. âIndustry Normsâ mean the generally accepted standards and norms in the forestry industry, including the accepted terms regarding pricing, contract duration, payment terms, volumes, product specifications, quality, the period of supply and force majeure;
1.18. [confidential];
1.19. [confidential];
1.20. [confidential];
1.21. "Merger" means the acquisition by SFC of the assets of the Target Firms as described in the Sale of Business Agreement, and the addendum thereto, for purposes of continuing to conduct the business of the Target Firms in the ordinary course, as notified to the Commission under case number: 2020AUG0084;
1.22. âMerged Entityâ means the Acquiring Firm and the Target Firms following the implementation of the Merger;
1.23. âMerging Partiesâ mean the Acquiring Firm and the Target Firms;
1.24. âMining Timber (not sawn and untreated)â means logs that are grown in plantations and are transported to mining timber sawmills;
1.25. âMining Timber (final product)â means the final timber products which have been sawn or milled in a sawmill and treated according to certain specifications;
1.26. [confidential];
1.27. âMonthâ means a calendar month;
1.28. [confidential];
1.29. [confidential];
1.30. âPeakâ means Peak Timbers Ltd, a company registered and incorporated in accordance with the company laws of the Republic of South Africa;
1.31. âPFPâ means Peak Forest Products (Pty) Ltd, a private company registered and incorporated in accordance with the company laws of eSwatini;
1.32. âPulp Logsâ mean logs that are cut to various lengths for different pulpwood mills;
1.33. [confidential];
1.34. [confidential];
1.35. [confidential];
1.36. [confidential];
1.37. âTarget Firmsâ mean Peak and PFP;
1.38. [confidential];
1.39. âTreated Building and Fencing Polesâ mean poles that have been treated for use in the building and fencing market;
1.40. âTreated Transmission Polesâ mean poles produced for the transmission poles market;
1.41. âTribunalâ means the Competition Tribunal of South Africa;
1.42. âTWKâ means TWK Investments Limited, a company incorporated under the company laws of South Africa and the controlling entity of SFC;
1.43. [confidential];
1.44. [confidential];
1.45. âUntreated Transmission Polesâ mean hardwood poles produced for pole treating plants that produce treated transmission poles;
1.46. âUntreated Building and Fencing Polesâ mean small diameter poles produced for treating plants, which in turn produce poles for the building and fencing market;
1.47. [confidential]; and
1.48. âWoodchipsâ mean small to medium sized pieces of wood formed by cutting or chipping larger pieces of wood such as trees, branches, logging residues, stumps, roots, and wood waste.
2.
CONDITIONS TO THE MERGER
2.1. A non-confidential version of these Conditions will be published on the Merged Entityâs website (https://www.twkagri.com) within five Days of the Implementation Date, and will remain there for a period of twelve months.
2.2. The Merged Entity will also provide the non-confidential version of these conditions to existing customers of Peak in South Africa within 14 days of the Approval Date. The Merged Entity will provide each of the existing customers of Peak with the details of the annual contract volumes (as set out in these Conditions) for the relevant products that will be offered to each existing customer for any supply agreements that are negotiated and entered into in terms of these Conditions. Each existing customer of Peak will only receive their own respective information.
3.
SUPPLY CONDITIONS
3.1. Mining Timber (not sawn and untreated)
3.1.1. TWK will continue to honour the contractual terms entered into by the Target Firms with [confidential] on [confidential] in respect of the supply of Mining Timber (not sawn and untreated) for the duration of the Existing Agreement, subject to the contractual terms. TWK will negotiate with [confidential], in good faith, to extend this Existing Agreement by a further [confidential], with the option to renew the Extended Supply Period for a further period subject to the agreement of both parties. The terms of the Extended Supply Period entered into between TWK and [confidential] will be based on Commercial Terms and Industry Norms.
3.1.2. The annual contract volumes of Mining Timber (not sawn and untreated) offered to [confidential] for the Extended Supply Period will be not less than the average volumes of Mining Timber (not sawn and untreated) that [confidential] has purchased over the [confidential] prior to the renegotiation of the Extended Supply Period.
3.1.3. TWK reserves the right to not supply [confidential] for accepted commercial reasons, including but not limited to credit risk, breach, hardship and force majeure.
3.1.4. TWK will continue to negotiate in good faith, with the aim of entering into a supply agreement for the supply of Mining Timber (not sawn and untreated) for a period of [confidential]from the Approval Date, with Peakâs existing customers (which are set out in clause 3.1.7 below). The terms of any supply agreements entered into will be based on Commercial Terms and Industry Norms.
3.1.5. The annual contract volumes of Mining Timber (not sawn and untreated) offered to the existing customers will be not less than the highest volume of Mining Timber (not sawn and untreated) that the existing customers have purchased from Peak in any of the last [confidential] since 2018.
3.1.6. TWK reserves the right to not supply a customer for accepted commercial reasons, including but not limited to credit risk, breach, hardship and force majeure.
3.1.7. The relevant existing customers of Peak for the supply of Mining Timber (not sawn and untreated) are:
3.1.7.1. [confidential]; and
3.1.7.2. [confidential].
3.1.8. In the unlikely event of TWKâs volumes of Mining Timber (not sawn and untreated) being reduced as a result of fire, theft or any other reason, TWK will ensure that customers with contractual relationships with TWK, including in particular [confidential], are supplied in accordance with the Commercial Terms with each customer. To the extent that a relationship with a customer is not contractually regulated, TWK will ensure that Mining Timber (not sawn and untreated) is offered to the customers of the Merged Entity on Commercial Terms, after meeting its internal requirements.
3.1.9. The Merging Parties shall provide the Commission with an annual breakdown of the pricing between BedRock and Peak for Mining Timber (not sawn and untreated).
3.2. Mining Timber (final product)
3.2.1. TWK, through BedRock, will continue, as and when necessary, to purchase Mining Timber (final product) from third party mills on a spot basis, for a period of [confidential] from the Approval Date. All spot purchases will be done on Commercial Terms and Industry Norms.
3.3. Untreated Transmission Poles
3.3.1. TWK will continue to negotiate in good faith, with the aim of entering into a supply agreement for the supply of Untreated Transmission Poles, for a period of [confidential] from the Approval Date, with Peakâs existing customers (which are set out in clause 3.3.4 below). The terms of any supply agreements entered into will be based on Commercial Terms and Industry Norms.
3.3.2. The annual contract volumes of Untreated Transmission Poles offered to the existing customers will be not less than the average volumes that the existing customers have purchased from Peak over the last [confidential] since 2018.
3.3.3. TWK reserves the right to not supply a customer for accepted commercial reasons, including but not limited to credit risk, breach, hardship and force majeure.
3.3.4. The relevant existing customers of Peak for the supply of Untreated Transmission Poles are:
3.3.4.1. [confidential];[4]
3.3.4.2. [confidential];
3.3.4.3. [confidential];
3.3.4.4. [confidential];
3.3.4.5. [confidential]; and
3.3.4.6. [confidential].
3.4. Untreated Building and Fencing Poles
3.4.1. TWK will continue to negotiate in good faith, with the aim of entering into a supply agreement for the supply of Untreated Building and Fencing Poles for a period of [confidential] from the Approval Date, with Peakâs existing customers (which are set out in clause 3.4.4 below). The terms of any supply agreements entered into will be based on Commercial Terms and Industry Norms.
3.4.2. The annual contract volumes of Untreated Building and Fencing Poles offered to the existing customers will be not less than the average volumes that the existing customers have purchased from Peak over the last [confidential] since 2018.
3.4.3. TWK reserves the right to not supply a customer for accepted commercial reasons, including but not limited to credit risk, breach, hardship and force majeure.
3.4.4. The relevant existing customers of Peak for the supply of Untreated Building and Fencing Poles are:
3.4.4.1. [confidential];
3.4.4.2. [confidential];
3.4.4.3. [confidential];[5]
3.4.4.4. [confidential];
3.4.4.5. [confidential];
3.4.4.6. [confidential];
3.4.4.7. [confidential];
3.4.4.8. [confidential];
3.4.4.9. [confidential];
3.4.4.10. [confidential];
3.4.4.11. [confidential]; and
3.4.4.12. [confidential].
3.5. Treated Building and Fencing Poles
3.5.1. TWK will continue to honour the supply agreement entered into in [confidential] with [confidential] for Treated Building and Fencing Poles for the remainder of the contract term, subject to the contractual terms, until the end of the agreement on [confidential]. In respect of this agreement, TWK supply [confidential] per annum of Treated Building and Fencing Poles to [confidential].
3.6. Pulp Logs
3.6.1. TWK will continue to negotiate in good faith, with the aim of entering into a supply agreement for the supply of Pulp Logs, for a period of [confidential] from the Approval Date, with Peakâs existing customers (which are set out in clause 3.6.5 below). The terms of any supply agreements entered into will be based on Commercial Terms and Industry Norms.
3.6.2. The annual contract volumes of Pulp Logs offered to the existing customers will be not less than the highest volume of Pulp Logs that the existing customers have purchased from Peak in any of the last [confidential] since 2018.
3.6.3. TWK reserves the right to not supply a customer for accepted commercial reasons, including but not limited to credit risk, breach, hardship and force majeure.
3.6.4. In addition, TWK further undertakes that it will continue with the existing price structures with Peakâs existing customers (which are set out in clause 3.6.5 below) for Pulp Logs and will negotiate any price increases with these existing customers on the normal anniversary of the agreement, taking into account the usual price drivers within the regional timber industry.
3.6.5. The relevant existing customers of Peak for the supply of Pulp Logs are:
3.6.5.1. [confidential];
3.6.5.2. [confidential];
3.6.5.3. [confidential];
3.6.5.4. [confidential]; and
3.6.5.5. [confidential].
3.7. Saw logs
3.7.1. TWK will continue to offer to supply [confidential] of saw logs to [confidential] for a period of [confidential] from the Approval Date, subject to availability of the saw logs produced by the Target Firms. The terms of any supply agreements entered into will be based on Commercial Terms and Industry Norms.
3.7.2. TWK reserves the right to not supply [confidential] for accepted commercial reasons, including but not limited to credit risk, breach, hardship and force majeure.
3.8. Other customers
3.8.1. Should the existing customers for the products listed in 3.1, 3.3, 3.4, 3.6 and 3.7 above not purchase their allocated volumes in any given year, the Merging Parties shall endeavour to supply the balance of the volumes to any customer in South Africa that requires the said product.
4.
MONITORING OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS
4.1. The Merging Parties shall inform the Commission of the Implementation Date within five Days of its occurrence.
4.2.
MONITORING OF SUPPLY CONDITIONS
4.2.1. The Merged Entity shall provide the Commission with a report within seven days of the Approval Date confirming the annual contract volumes of the relevant products that will be offered to the existing customers for any supply agreements that are negotiated and entered into in terms of these Conditions.
4.2.2. The Merged Entity shall provide the Commission with a comprehensive report, on the anniversary of the Implementation Date for a period of [confidential], detailing the extent of its compliance with clauses 3.1 to 3.7 of these Conditions. This report will include information detailing:
4.2.2.1. The volumes per customer of the products supplied to the existing customers of the Target Firms for the preceding year, for each of the markets identified in clauses 3.1, 3.3, 3.4 and
3.6 above.
4.2.2.2. The volumes of the saw logs supplied to [confidential] for the preceding year, in terms of clause 3.7 above.
4.2.2.3. An annual breakdown of the pricing for Mining Timber (not sawn and untreated) between BedRock and Peak; and
4.2.2.4. In the event a customer was not supplied with the required product and/or volume, the report must also include a detailed explanation on the reason/s for not supplying the relevant product to the customer, as well as details regarding the shortfall of the products that were not supplied.
4.2.3. The reports shall be accompanied by an affidavit, duly deposed to by the managing director of the Merged Entity, attesting to the accuracy of the entire contents of the report.
4.2.4. The Commission may request any additional information from the Merging Parties which the Commission from time to time deems necessary for the monitoring of compliance with these Conditions.
5.
BREACH
5.1. An apparent breach by the Merged Entity of any of the Conditions shall be dealt with in terms of Rule 39 of the Rules for the Conduct of Proceedings in the Commission and Rule 37 of the Rules for the Conduct of Proceedings in the Tribunal.
6.
VARIATION
6.1. The Merging Parties and/or the Commission may at any time, on good cause shown, apply to the Tribunal for the waiver, relaxation, modification, variation and/or substitution of one or more of the Conditions.
7.
GENERAL
7.1. The documents referred to in the Conditions shall be submitted to the following email address: mergerconditions@compcom.co.za
[1] TWK Agriculture is owned by individual shareholders who are current or former farmers, and none of whom have a controlling interest.
[2] Merger record, page 776.
[3]
XXXXXXXXX [REDACTED]
[4] [confidential]
[5] [confidential]
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.