Sign in
South Africa Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

South Africa Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
1 court collection
Last checked

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Competition Law [2013] ZACT 7

Autobi (Pty) Ltd v Transunion Auto Information Solutions (Pty) Ltd (59/CR/May12)

Autobi (Pty) Ltd v Transunion Auto Information Solutions (Pty) Ltd (59/CR/May12) [2013] ZACT 7 (11 February 2013)

The Tribunal granted condonation for Autobid’s late complaint referral, finding good cause after attorney misconduct, prompt remedial steps, and no prejudice to Transunion.

  • Condonation
  • Abuse Of Dominance
  • Illegal Price Discrimination
  • Essential Facility
  • Copyright Infringement
  • Competition-law
Read case analysis
Competition Law [2010] ZACT 12

AEC Electronics (Pty) Ltd v Department of Minerals and Energy (48/CR/Jun09)

AEC Electronics (Pty) Ltd v Department of Minerals and Energy (48/CR/Jun09) [2010] ZACT 12; [2009] 2 CPLR 379 (CT) (8 February 2010)

The Tribunal held it lacked jurisdiction over a complaint against a state regulator, finding the Department of Minerals and Energy was not a “firm” under the Competition Act.

  • Abuse Of Dominance
  • Essential Facility
  • Exclusionary Conduct
  • Jurisdiction Of Tribunal
  • Competition-jurisdiction
  • Firm-definition
Read case analysis
Competition Law [2009] ZACT 26

DCD Dorbyl (Pty) Ltd v Globe Engineering Works (Pty) Ltd (108/LM/Oct08)

DCD Dorbyl (Pty) Ltd v Globe Engineering Works (Pty) Ltd (108/LM/Oct08) [2009] ZACT 26; [2009] 1 CPLR 122 (CT) (30 April 2009)

The Tribunal conditionally approved DCD Dorbyl’s acquisition of Globe Engineering, requiring access to A-berth and limits on retrenchments.

  • Merger Control
  • Essential Facility
  • Foreclosure
  • Public Interest
  • Employment Effects
  • Merger-control
Read case analysis
Competition Law [2006] ZACT 84

Mandla-Matla Publishing (Pty) Ltd and Independent Newspapers (Pty) Ltd (48/CR/Jun04)

Mandla-Matla Publishing (Pty) Ltd and Independent Newspapers (Pty) Ltd (48/CR/Jun04) [2006] ZACT 84; [2006] 2 CPLR 499 (CT) (6 November 2006)

The Tribunal found that Mandla-Matla failed to establish that the exclusivity clauses and refusal to provide distribution information by Independent Newspapers resulted in a substantial prevention or lessening of competition or anti-competitive effect as required by sections 5(1), 8(c), and 8(d)(i) of the Competition Act. Evidence showed that Mandla-Matla and its new distributor, Natal Witness, were able to set up alternative distribution networks within a short period, indicating low barriers to entry and minimal market foreclosure. The rapid expansion of the isiZulu newspaper market followi…

  • Exclusive Dealing
  • Abuse Of Dominance
  • Vertical Agreements
  • Anti-competitive Effect
  • Essential Facility
  • Market Foreclosure
Read case analysis
Competition Law [2002] ZACT 44

Avalon Group (Pty) Ltd and Another and Old Mutual Properties and Others (02/CR/Jan01,25/CR/May01)

Avalon Group (Pty) Ltd and Another and Old Mutual Properties and Others (02/CR/Jan01,25/CR/May01) [2002] ZACT 44 (8 July 2002)

The Tribunal ordered discovery of the later Gateway lease and some Ster-Kinekor marketing documents, rejected broad discovery requests, and refused to postpone argument on points in limine.

  • Discovery Procedure
  • Dominance
  • Essential Facility
  • Exclusionary Act
  • Vertical Restrictive Practice
  • Competition-law
Read case analysis
Competition Law [2000] ZACT 46

South African Raisins (Pty) Ltd and Another and SAD Holdings Ltd and Another

South African Raisins (Pty) Ltd and Another and SAD Holdings Ltd and Another [2000] ZACT 46 (24 November 2000)

The Competition Tribunal granted interim relief against SAD Holdings, finding sufficient evidence of exclusionary conduct under section 8(d)(i) of the Competition Act.

  • Abuse Of Dominance
  • Exclusionary Conduct
  • Essential Facility
  • Interim Relief
  • Restrictive Practices
  • Competition-law
Read case analysis
Competition Law [2000] ZACT 16

DW Intergrators CC and SAS Institute (Pty) Ltd (14/IR/Nov99)

DW Intergrators CC and SAS Institute (Pty) Ltd (14/IR/Nov99) [2000] ZACT 16 (1 May 2000)

The Competition Tribunal dismissed DW Integrators’ application for interim relief, finding that it had not proved SAS’s dominance, irreparable harm, or frustration of the Act.

  • Abuse Of Dominance
  • Essential Facility
  • Interim Relief
  • Market Definition
  • Exclusionary Conduct
  • Abuse-of-dominance
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

South Africa decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.