South Africa Case Law

Competition Commission of South Africa v Jasco Security and Fire Solutions (Pty) Ltd (CR086Aug19; SA044Jul21)

Competition Commission of South Africa v Jasco Security and Fire Solutions (Pty) Ltd (CR086Aug19; SA044Jul21) [2021] ZACT 95 (16 September 2021)

Court

Competition Tribunal

Case number

CR086Aug19/SA044Jul21

Judges

AW Wessels, E Daniels, Y Carrim

The Tribunal confirmed a settlement between the Competition Commission and Jasco Fire over alleged market division, imposing a R300,000 penalty and compliance duties.

• Market Division
• Administrative Penalty
• Consent Agreement
• Section 4 1 B Ii
• Compliance Programme
• Competition-law

Competition Commission v Irvin & Johnson Ltd and Another (CR198Oct18)

Competition Commission v Irvin & Johnson Ltd and Another (CR198Oct18) [2020] ZACT 103 (4 September 2020)

Court

Competition Tribunal

Case number

CR198Oct18

Judges

Enver Daniels, Yasmin Carrim, Andiswa Ndoni

The Tribunal dismissed a market-allocation complaint, finding the beef-processing agreements were a commercial manufacturing arrangement, not a section 4(1)(b)(ii) cartel.

• Market Allocation
• Horizontal Agreements
• Section 4 1 B Ii
• Manufacturing Agreement
• Customer Allocation
• Cartel Characterisation

Competition Commission Roadspan Surfaces (Pty) Ltd and Another (CR163Nov16)

Competition Commission Roadspan Surfaces (Pty) Ltd and Another (CR163Nov16) [2019] ZACT 72 (25 July 2019)

Court

Competition Tribunal

Case number

CR163Nov16

Judges

Norman Manoim, Yasmin Carrim, Andreas Wessels

The Tribunal dismissed a Competition Commission complaint alleging a 2008 market-division agreement between Roadspan Surfaces and Much Asphalt in Gauteng.

• Horizontal Agreements
• Market Division
• Section 4 1 B Ii
• Burden Of Proof
• Documentary Evidence
• Competition-law

Competition Commission v Primkop Airport Management (Pty) Ltd (016691)

Competition Commission v Primkop Airport Management (Pty) Ltd (016691) [2013] ZACT 47 (7 June 2013)

Court

Competition Tribunal

Case number

016691

Judges

N Manoim, M Mazwai, A Ndoni

The Tribunal found that the MOU between SanParks and PAM constituted a market division agreement, as SanParks agreed to downgrade Skukuza Airport and refrain from competing with PAM in exchange for monetary compensation. This arrangement contravened section 4(1)(b)(ii) of the Competition Act. The Tribunal confirmed the consent agreement, which included an administrative penalty of R2 million (4% of PAM's 2009 turnover) and the cessation of the MOU's effects. The addendum clarified that the MOU is no longer in force and that SanParks confirmed its lapse in 2003. The order resolves all proceedi…

Source excerpt

• Market Division
• Administrative Penalty
• Consent Agreement
• Section 4 1 B Ii
• Leniency Policy