Esheria South Africa Case Law
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

Search and filter South Africa case law

Results update automatically as you type.

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Competition Law [2005] ZACT 69

Johnnic Holdings Limited and Hosken Consolidated Investments Limited CC (65/FN/Jul05)

Johnnic Holdings Limited and Hosken Consolidated Investments Limited CC (65/FN/Jul05) [2005] ZACT 69; [2005] 2 CPLR 508 (CT) (21 October 2005)

Court
Competition Tribunal
Case number
65/FN/Jul05
Judges
L. Reyburn, D. Lewis, T. Orleyn

The Tribunal found that HCI's 40% shareholding in Johnnic did not constitute control under section 12(2)(g) of the Competition Act, given the presence of substantial and experienced institutional shareholders holding the majority of shares and the lack of board representation or voting arrangements by HCI. There was no evidence of joint control with shareholders who had given irrevocable undertakings to sell shares. The Tribunal distinguished the present case from the Gold Fields/Harmony cases, noting the absence of a voting agreement or coalition that would guarantee control. The Tribunal he…

Source excerpt

  • Merger Control
  • Implementation Prior Approval
  • Material Influence
  • Declaratory Relief
  • Interdict
  • Control Definition
Read case analysis
Competition Law [2003] ZACT 19

Competition Commission and Edgars Consolidated Stores Ltd and Others (95/FN/Dec02)

Competition Commission and Edgars Consolidated Stores Ltd and Others (95/FN/Dec02) [2003] ZACT 19 (24 March 2003)

Court
Competition Tribunal
Case number
95/FN/Dec02
Judges
N. Manoim, D. Lewis, P. Maponya

The Tribunal found that the acquisition by Edgars Consolidated Stores Ltd of the book debts and ancillary rights from Retail Apparel (Pty) Ltd constituted the acquisition of part of a business, not merely an asset. The transaction provided Edgars with access to the seller's customer base, subsequent debts, and control over debtor management, thereby enhancing its competitive position in the retail apparel market. The structuring of the transaction into two legs was primarily for expediency and did not alter its substantive nature as a merger. The respondents implemented the merger prior to ob…

Source excerpt

  • Merger Notification
  • Implementation Prior Approval
  • Administrative Penalty
  • Definition Of Business
  • Asset Acquisition
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.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.