South Africa Case Law

Siyakhuphuka Investment Holdings (Pty) Ltd v Transnet Soc and Another (158/CAC/Nov17)

Siyakhuphuka Investment Holdings (Pty) Ltd v Transnet Soc and Another (158/CAC/Nov17) [2018] ZACAC 4; [2018] 1 CPLR 88 (CAC) (3 July 2018)

Court

Competition Appeal Court

Case number

158/CAC/Nov17

Judge

Mnguni JA

The court held that the Competition Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear complaints regarding abuse of dominance and exclusionary conduct by Transnet and its divisions under the Competition Act, even where the conduct is also subject to oversight by another regulatory authority such as the Ports Regulator. The reasoning in Competition Commission of SA v Telkom SA Ltd & another was applied, confirming that the Competition Act establishes concurrent jurisdiction for competition authorities in all competition matters. The appellant's complaints were found to be properly characterised as competition…

Source excerpt

• Abuse Of Dominance
• Essential Facilities
• Concurrent Jurisdiction
• Exclusionary Conduct
• Licensing Of Port Facilities

Telkom SA Ltd v Competition Commission South Africa (55/CR/Jul09, 73/CR/Oct09, 78/CR/Nov09)

Telkom SA Ltd v Competition Commission South Africa (55/CR/Jul09, 73/CR/Oct09, 78/CR/Nov09) [2011] ZACT 4 (4 February 2011)

Court

Competition Tribunal

Case number

55/CR/Jul09, 73/CR/Oct09, 78/CR/Nov09

Judges

Norman Manoim, Yasmin Carrim, Takalani Madima

The Tribunal found that IS's late filing of an amended second referral should be condoned, as Telkom failed to demonstrate any prejudice and both parties agreed to the withdrawal of the first referral and amendment of the second. Telkom's exceptions to the Commission's and IS's referrals were dismissed as misconceived or lacking substance. The Tribunal held that cumulative reliance on the same facts for different contraventions is permissible and should be determined after evidence is led. The Commission's pleadings were found to sufficiently allege economic value for excessive pricing, and m…

Source excerpt

• Abuse Of Dominance
• Excessive Pricing
• Margin Squeeze
• Essential Facilities
• Exception Procedure
• Condonation

Trudon (Pty) Ltd v Directory Solutions CC and Another (96/CAC/Apr10)

Trudon (Pty) Ltd v Directory Solutions CC and Another (96/CAC/Apr10) [2010] ZACAC 1; [2010] 2 CPLR 202 (CAC) (1 September 2010)

Court

Competition Appeal Court

Case number

96/CAC/Apr10

Judges

Dambuza, Davis, Mailula

Competition Appeal Court set aside interim relief against Trudon, holding the respondent had not made out a prima facie abuse-of-dominance case.

• Abuse Of Dominance
• Interim Relief
• Essential Facilities
• Market Definition
• Exclusionary Conduct
• Competition-law

Directory Solutions CC v Trudon (Pty) Ltd and Another (77/IR/Nov09)

Directory Solutions CC v Trudon (Pty) Ltd and Another (77/IR/Nov09) [2010] ZACT 27; [2010] 1 CPLR 96 (CT) (8 April 2010)

Court

Competition Tribunal

Case number

77/IR/Nov09

Judges

Yasmin Carrim, Lawrence Reyburn, Andreas Wessels

The Tribunal granted interim relief preventing Trudon and Telkom from requiring upfront payment for directory entries submitted through Directory Solutions.

• Abuse Of Dominance
• Exclusionary Conduct
• Interim Relief
• Essential Facilities
• Balance Of Convenience
• Competition-law

Competition Commission of South Africa v Telkom SA LTD and Others (623/2009)

Competition Commission of South Africa v Telkom SA LTD and Others (623/2009) [2009] ZASCA 155; [2010] 2 All SA 433 (SCA) (27 November 2009)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

623/2009

Judges

Harms, Brand, Malan, Wallis

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that competition authorities retained concurrent jurisdiction over Telkom-related telecoms conduct and upheld the Commission's referral.

• Concurrent Jurisdiction
• Abuse Of Dominance
• Essential Facilities
• Price Discrimination
• Regulatory Authority Powers
• Review Of Administrative Action

Xstrata South Africa (Pty) Ltd and Egalite (Pty) Ltd / International Carbon Holdings (Proprietary) Limited (54/LM/Jul04)

Xstrata South Africa (Pty) Ltd and Egalite (Pty) Ltd / International Carbon Holdings (Proprietary) Limited (54/LM/Jul04) [2004] ZACT 77 (20 December 2004)

Court

Competition Tribunal

Case number

54/LM/Jul04

Judges

N. Manoim, MTK. Moerane, M. Mokuena

The Competition Tribunal conditionally approved Xstrata’s merger with African Carbon firms, requiring continued char supply to downstream ferrochrome producers.

• Input Foreclosure
• Merger Control
• Essential Facilities
• Barriers To Entry
• Vertical Integration
• Input-foreclosure

South African Fruit Terminals (Pty) Limited v Portnet and Others

South African Fruit Terminals (Pty) Limited v Portnet and Others [2001] ZACT 18 (29 April 2001)

Court

Competition Tribunal

Case number

52/IR/Sep01

Judges

N. Manoim, D. Lewis, M. Moerane

The Competition Tribunal dismissed SAFT’s interim-relief application, finding no proven unfair discrimination by Portnet and no properly pleaded case against Capespan.

• Interim Relief
• Essential Facilities
• Price Discrimination
• Dominance
• Volume Discounts
• Access To Infrastructure