Sasol South Africa Ltd v Vitol Emerald Bidco (Pty) Ltd and Others (LM196Mar23) [2023] ZACT 78 (6 December 2023)
Court
Competition Tribunal
Case number
LM196Mar23
Judge
M Mazwai
The Competition Tribunal granted Sasol leave to intervene in merger proceedings, but limited its participation to submissions on a local procurement remedy and related confidentiality issues.
Supreme Health Administrators (Pty) Ltd / Network Healthcare Holdings Limited / Council for Medical Schemes and Competition Commission / Phodiclinics (Pty) Ltd / DJF Defty (Pty) Ltd and 10 Others (122/LM/Dec05) [2006] ZACT 45; [2006] 1 CPLR 422 (CT) (26 May 2006)
Court
Competition Tribunal
Case number
122/LM/Dec05
Judges
Y Carrim, M Mokuena, L Reyburn
The Tribunal exercised its discretion to grant Supreme Health, Netcare, and the Council for Medical Schemes leave to intervene in the merger proceedings. The Tribunal found that CMS had a clear material and substantial interest as mandated by statute. Netcare, as a major competitor, demonstrated sufficient interest and ability to assist the Tribunal. Supreme Health's directors possessed relevant knowledge, and their participation under the company's banner would better ventilate issues. The Tribunal rejected limiting the scope of intervention, finding that broad participation would assist its…
Anglo South Africa (Pty) Ltd and Others v The Industrial Development Corporation of South Africa Ltd and Others (24/CAC/Oct02) [2002] ZACAC 4 (15 November 2002)
Court
Competition Appeal Court
Case number
24/CAC/Oct02
Judges
Davis, Jali, Selikowitz
The Competition Appeal Court set aside a single Tribunal member’s rulings on intervention, confidentiality, and expert appointment in merger proceedings.
Industrial Development Corporation of South Africa Ltd and Another in re: Anglo American Holdings Ltd and Kumba Resources Ltd; Anglo South Africa Capital (Pty) Ltd v Anglovaal Mining Ltd (1) [2002] ZACT 53 (26 September 2002)
Court
Competition Tribunal
Case number
45/LM/Jun02 and 46/LM/Jun02
Judge
NM Manoim
The Competition Tribunal held that the IDC could intervene meaningfully in the merger case, with confidential access for its lawyers and experts, and that the Tribunal could call an independent economist.
