Competition Commission v Telkom SA Ltd; Telkom SA Ltd v Competition Commission (73/CR/Oct09) [2013] ZACT 9; [2013] 1 CPLR 305 (CT) (13 February 2013)

Competition Commission v Telkom SA Ltd; Telkom SA Ltd v Competition Commission (73/CR/Oct09) [2013] ZACT 9; [2013] 1 CPLR 305 (CT) (13 February 2013)

The Tribunal found that Rule 14(1)(d) is subordinate legislation binding on the Tribunal and other courts, and applies to proceedings before the Tribunal. The documents listed in the Commission's supplementary affidavit, including internal reports, expert opinions, peer reviews, notes, benchmarking reports, emails, memoranda, presentations, and calculations, all fall within the ambit of restricted information under Rule 14(1)(d). The Commission provided sufficient detail to justify the restriction, and Telkom did not challenge the descriptions with further affidavits or requests for detail. The Tribunal held that Rule 14(1)(d) is consistent with the grounds for restriction in section 44...

Citation
[2013] ZACT 9
Parties
Applicant: The Competition Commission; Respondent: Telkom SA Ltd; Applicant: Telkom SA Ltd; Respondent: The Competition Commission
Court
Competition Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
13 February 2013
Case Number
73/CR/Oct09
Procedural Posture
Discovery Application / Interlocutory Application for Further and Better Discovery Prior to Hearing of Complaint Referral
Outcome
Telkom's application for further and better discovery is dismissed.
Judges
Y Carrim, A Wessels, T Madima
Legal Topics
Discovery of Documents, Restricted Information, Litigation Privilege, Competition Act, Promotion of Access to Information Act
Competition Law Civil Procedure Discovery of Documents Restricted Information Litigation Privilege Competition Act Promotion of Access to Information Act

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Competition Commission

Applicant

Telkom SA Ltd

Respondent

Telkom SA Ltd

Applicant

The Competition Commission

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Discovery Application / Interlocutory Application for Further and Better Discovery Prior to Hearing of Complaint Referral

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether documents listed in the Commission's supplementary affidavit fall within the ambit of restricted information under Rule 14(1)(d) of the Commission's Rules.
  2. 2 Whether Rule 14(1)(d) applies to Tribunal proceedings or only to Commission proceedings.
  3. 3 Whether Rule 14(1)(d) is unconstitutional or inconsistent with the Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA).

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that Rule 14(1)(d) is subordinate legislation binding on the Tribunal and other courts, and applies to proceedings before the Tribunal. The documents listed in the Commission's supplementary affidavit, including internal reports, expert opinions, peer reviews, notes, benchmarking reports, emails, memoranda, presentations, and calculations, all fall within the ambit of restricted information under Rule 14(1)(d). The Commission provided sufficient detail to justify the restriction, and Telkom did not challenge the descriptions with further affidavits or requests for detail. The Tribunal held that Rule 14(1)(d) is consistent with the grounds for restriction in section 44...

Court Disposition

Telkom's application for further and better discovery is dismissed.

Orders

  • Telkom's application for further and better discovery is dismissed.
  • There is no order as to costs.