|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| November 2020 |
|
|
Reported
Crisis‑induced temporary market power can establish dominance; excessive pandemic price increases found but penalty avoided as de minimis.
Competition law — Excessive pricing (s 8(1)(a)) — Dominance and market power in crisis conditions — ‘Lucky monopolist’ concept — Prima facie case and onus under s 8(2) — Reasonableness factors under s 8(3) — Detriment to consumers — Penalty assessment and de minimis considerations.
|
18 November 2020 |
| October 2020 |
|
|
|
27 October 2020 |
|
Mentioning prices at an industry meeting without consensus does not establish a binding price‑fixing agreement under section 4(1)(b)(i).
Competition law – s 4(1)(b)(i) – agreement/price‑fixing – consensus required that parties regard arrangement as binding; mere mention/price signalling insufficient; reliance on draft minutes and minute‑takers’ notes; proof delimited by pleadings; limitation/s 67(1) – prescription; evidentiary value of subsequent conduct.
|
21 October 2020 |
| August 2020 |
|
|
Commission failed to prove the respondent’s continued participation in a cartel after change of ownership; appeal dismissed.
Competition law – s 4(1)(b) – alleged cartel and market allocation – whether attendance at pre‑Act meeting and subsequent information exchanges establish ongoing cartel membership; change of ownership and duty to speak; evidentiary standard: awareness and intent to contribute to cartel’s objectives; aggregated industry data insufficient to prove cartel participation.
|
7 August 2020 |
|
Reported
Withdrawal of a Tribunal referral completes proceedings under s 67(2), barring re-referral or reinstatement for the same conduct.
Competition law – Withdrawal of Tribunal referral – Meaning of 'completed' in s 67(2) – Jeopardy attaches on referral – Withdrawal completes proceedings and bars re-referral/reinstatement – Double jeopardy and abuse of process concerns.
|
3 August 2020 |
| July 2020 |
|
|
Reported
A respondent may only appeal a Tribunal interim order if it has a final or irreversible effect on market competition.
Competition law — interim relief (s49C) — appealability — "final effect" and "irreversible effect" defined; interim order appealable only if it prevents final adjudication or causes irreversible competitive harm; costs order in interim proceedings constrained by s57 and Tribunal rules.
|
15 July 2020 |
| February 2020 |
|
|
Whether the Competition Commission may assert jurisdiction over foreign banks for extraterritorial cartel conduct affecting South Africa.
Competition law – extraterritorial application – s 3(1) applies to conduct outside Republic with direct, immediate and substantial foreseeable effects in South Africa; Personal jurisdiction – common‑law development to recognise adequate connecting factors, appropriateness and convenience for assuming jurisdiction over peregrini; Declaratory relief – Tribunal may only grant orders where it has jurisdiction; Pleading – Commission required to file comprehensive new referral affidavit specifying facts to establish subject‑matter and personal jurisdiction; Joinder – deferred pending proper referral; Cross‑appeal – inclusion of non‑appealing respondent not an irregular step.
|
26 February 2020 |
|
Long-term tying arrangements were not proven to have foreclosed competition or caused higher prices.
Competition law – Exclusive dealing/tying – Foreclosure (actual and potential) – Burden of proof and role of market-share and machine-sales data – Counterfactual evidence – Pricing analysis – Insufficient proof of anti-competitive effect – Complaint dismissed.
|
25 February 2020 |
|
Reported
Whether the proposed hospital merger would substantially lessen local competition or be unjustifiable on public interest grounds.
Competition — Merger control: market definition — private multidisciplinary acute inpatient hospital services; exclusion of day-case services. Geographic market — local markets may be narrowly drawn; Potchefstroom and Klerksdorp are separate local markets. SSNIP and patient travel patterns — limited substitution across towns. Public interest (s12A(1)(b), s12A(3)) — price effects on insured/uninsured patients may justify conditions even absent SLC. NHN procurement exemption — material counterfactual reducing procurement-based harm. Actuarial evidence — admissible and capable of showing merger efficiencies. Remedies — behavioural remedies must be practicable, proportionate and enforceable
|
6 February 2020 |