Competition Commission and American Natural Soda Ash CHG Global (Pty) Ltd (disqualification) (49/CR/Apr00)
Competition Commission and American Natural Soda Ash CHG Global (Pty) Ltd (disqualification) (49/CR/Apr00) [2006] ZACT 75 (6 September 2006)
The Tribunal held that section 3(1) of the Competition Act does not require 'effect' to mean adverse or harmful effect. The word 'effect' bears its ordinary meaning of result, consequence, or outcome, and the Act's jurisdiction is established by the presence of economic activity within or having an effect within South Africa, regardless of whether the effect is negative. The Tribunal rejected Ansac's arguments based on textual ambiguity, policy, and international law, finding no authority or consistent international rule requiring proof of harm for jurisdiction. The Tribunal further held that…
Source excerpt
- Extraterritorial Jurisdiction
- Effects Doctrine
- Locus Standi
- Restrictive Horizontal Practices
- Per Se Prohibition
- Statutory Interpretation