South Africa Case Law

Afrocentric Health Limited v Discovery Health Medical Scheme and Others; In re: Afrocentric Healthcare Limited v Discovery Health Medical Scheme and Another (CP003Apr15/Joi120Sep15)

Afrocentric Health Limited v Discovery Health Medical Scheme and Others; In re: Afrocentric Healthcare Limited v Discovery Health Medical Scheme and Another (CP003Apr15/Joi120Sep15) [2016] ZACT 70; [2016] 2 CPLR 888 (CT) (15 August 2016)

Court

Competition Tribunal

Case number

CP003Apr15/Joi120Sep15

Judges

Yasmin Carrim, Anton Roskam, Fiona Tregenna

The Tribunal found that while all proposed respondents have a substantial interest in the outcome, joinder at this stage would be unfair and premature. The exception raised by the first and second respondents regarding the lack of a cause of action must be determined before requiring the proposed respondents to defend a case that may be unclear or excipiable. Joinder is discretionary under CTR 45(1), and the interests of justice require that the exception be resolved first to avoid unnecessary costs and ensure clarity for all parties. The application for joinder is therefore dismissed, but th…

Source excerpt

• Joinder Of Parties
• Referral Rule
• Horizontal Relationship
• Material Interest
• Exception Application

Information Technology Consultants (Pty) Ltd v National Credit Regulator and Others; In Re: National Credit Regulator v Du Plessis N.O. and Another (NCT/8616/2013/57(1)(P))

Information Technology Consultants (Pty) Ltd v National Credit Regulator and Others; In Re: National Credit Regulator v Du Plessis N.O. and Another (NCT/8616/2013/57(1)(P)) [2014] ZANCT 29 (7 August 2014)

Court

National Consumer Tribunal

Case number

NCT/8616/2013/57(1)(P)

Judge

B. Dumisa

The Tribunal granted Intecon leave to intervene in a National Credit Act cancellation matter, holding that it had a material interest in the issues.

• Intervention In Proceedings
• Material Interest
• Joinder Vs Intervention
• National Credit Act
• Credit Provider Registration
• Intervention-in-proceedings

Community Healthcare Holdings (Pty) Ltd / Cornucopia (Pty) Ltd and Competition Commission and Others (105/LM/Dec04)

Community Healthcare Holdings (Pty) Ltd / Cornucopia (Pty) Ltd and Competition Commission and Others (105/LM/Dec04) [2005] ZACT 11; [2005] 1 CPLR 285 (CT) (16 February 2005)

Court

Competition Tribunal

Case number

105/LM/Dec04

Judges

Norman Manoim, David Lewis, Thandi Orleyn

The Tribunal found that the current merger proceedings were not a continuation of the prior Medi Clinic proceedings, but a new matter requiring a fresh application for intervention. The applicants failed to demonstrate a material interest or any value they could add to the Tribunal's inquiry. Their arguments were vague, repetitive, and focused on their own commercial interests rather than competition or public interest concerns. The Tribunal emphasised that intervention is not granted merely by parroting statutory language or asserting commercial disadvantage. The applicants did not provide u…

Source excerpt

• Merger Control
• Intervention Rights
• Public Interest
• Empowerment
• Material Interest
• Scheme Of Arrangement