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
2 court collections
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 [2017] ZACAC 6

Power Construction (West Cape) (Pty) Ltd and Another v Competition Commission of South Africa (145/CAC/Sep16)

Power Construction (West Cape) (Pty) Ltd and Another v Competition Commission of South Africa (145/CAC/Sep16) [2017] ZACAC 6; [2017] 2 CPLR 589 (CAC) (2 May 2017)

Court
Competition Appeal Court
Case number
145/CAC/Sep16
Judges
Davis JP, Vally, Makgoba

The court held that the Competition Commission's complaint initiation on 1 September 2009 was valid and included the appellants by reference to 'other firms' in the construction industry. The appellants voluntarily disclosed their involvement in the prohibited practice in response to the Commission's invitation, and were properly added to the complaint. The court found that the prohibited practice of collusive tendering did not cease with the award of the tender, but continued until the final payment was made on 17 February 2009. Since the initiation of the complaint occurred within three yea…

Source excerpt

  • Collusive Tendering
  • Prescription Under Competition Act
  • Administrative Penalty
  • Complaint Initiation
  • Cover Pricing
Read case analysis
Competition Law [2011] ZACT 71

Paramount Mills (Pty) Ltd v Competition Commission: In re; Competition Commission v Pioneer Foods (15/CR/MAR10)

Paramount Mills (Pty) Ltd v Competition Commission: In re; Competition Commission v Pioneer Foods (15/CR/MAR10) [2011] ZACT 71; [2011] 2 CPLR 389 (CT) (7 September 2011)

Court
Competition Tribunal
Case number
15/CR/Mar10
Judges
Y Carrim, A Wessels, L Reyburn

The Tribunal held that the Commission's referral against Paramount Mills meets the statutory requirements for complaint referral under Rule 15(1) of the Competition Act. The referral provides sufficient information for Paramount Mills to understand and answer the case, as evidenced by its detailed answering affidavit and its ability to raise the prescription point. The Tribunal rejected the argument that the referral must meet the standard of a prima facie case or the precision of pleadings in motion proceedings. The Tribunal's proceedings are sui generis and not strictly adversarial or equiv…

Source excerpt

  • Cartel Conduct
  • Complaint Referral
  • Pleading Standards
  • Prescription Under Competition Act
  • Motion Proceedings
  • Sui Generis Tribunal Process
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.