South Africa Case Law

Linpac Plastics (SA) Pty Ltd and Another v Du Plessis and Another, In Re: Linpac Plastics Ltd and Others v Du Plessis and Others (019513)

Linpac Plastics (SA) Pty Ltd and Another v Du Plessis and Another, In Re: Linpac Plastics Ltd and Others v Du Plessis and Others (019513) [2014] ZACT 64; [2014] 2 CPLR 516 (CT) (6 November 2014)

Court

Competition Tribunal

Case number

019513

Judges

Norman Manoim, Andiswa Ndoni, Mondo Mazwai

The Tribunal held that the prescription period in section 67(1) of the Competition Act does not apply to referrals made by a civil court under section 65(2)(b). The language of section 67(1) is specific to complaint referrals initiated under section 49B and does not extend to court referrals, which are governed by a distinct process. The Tribunal distinguished between the public nature of complaint referrals and the private nature of court referrals, noting that the latter bypasses the Competition Commission and is limited to the parties in the civil suit. The Tribunal found that imposing the…

Source excerpt

• Prescription Period
• Court Referral
• Prohibited Practices
• Section 65 Referral
• Section 67 Limitation

Leonard and Others v Nedbank Limited and Others (84/CR/AUG07)

Leonard and Others v Nedbank Limited and Others (84/CR/AUG07) [2008] ZACT 37 (21 May 2008)

Court

Competition Tribunal

Case number

84/CR/AUG07

Judges

N Manoim, D Lewis, T Orleyn

The Tribunal dismissed a stay application, held that merger and collusion complaints were not properly referred, and found the tying complaint prescribed.

• Section 65 Referral
• Tying And Bundling
• Merger Notification
• Collusion
• Prescription
• Costs Award