Category: cartels

Cable Cartel may lead to battle of the titans

Posted on by andreasstargard

The South African Competition Commission (the Commission) has recently referred its findings of cartel conduct against Alvern Cables, South Ocean Electric Wire Company (SOEW), Tulisa Cables, and Aberdare Cables who are all suppliers of power cables, to the Competition Tribunal (Tribunal). The Power cables include products such as house wire, surface twin and earth wire and are generally made from, amongst other things, copper, aluminium, polyethylene, steel tape and galvanised wire. These power cables are used to distribute electricity to residential and commercial users.

The Commission found that between 2001 to at least 2010, the firms directly or indirectly fixed the selling prices of power cables to wholesalers, distributors and original equipment manufacturers. The Commission, in its referral, is requesting that the maximum penalty of 10% of the annual turnover of the companies should be imposed.

Acting Commissioner Tembinkosi Bonakele had some interesting remarks regarding the matter: “We have been working tirelessly to thwart any effort that goes to undermine South Africa’s global position that provides value to businesses. Our steadily growing economy can ill-afford rogue business practices” This from the same individual who defended the right of Government to intervene on the ill-defined “public interest” criterion in high-profile merger investigations, thus subjecting them to lengthy and costly reviews.
It is noteworthy to mention that amongst the affected customers who bought these products, were the Bidvest Group (Voltex Group), ARB Holdings Ltd; Universal Cables (Pty) Ltd, Trinity Cables CC, Powermac, Paragons and South Atlantic Cables and Electrobase. It is a small group of companies, with a great amount of resources, which could mean that civil damages might be instituted if the alleged cartel members are found guilty before the Tribunal.

Furthermore, the first class action matters based on competition law contraventions which are currently before the high courts of South Africa will be finalsised by the time the cable cartel proceedings have been finalised before the Tribunal, which means there would be a clear picture of the situation where distributors and end consumers institute damages claims simultaneously against the same parties.

The Acting Commissioner
The Acting Commissioner

Cartel regulation in S.A. – 2014 Oxenham

Posted on by andreasstargard

south_africa

In addition to his highlights of the latest developments in the ZA cartel sphere, AfricanAntitrust.com editor John Oxenham recently published an excellent overview of Cartel Regulation in South Africa.

A must-read.

We are making the full PDF available to our blog readers.  The piece was originally published by Global Competition Review.

John Oxenham, editor
John Oxenham, AAT editor

 

Cartels: Developments in South Africa

Posted on by andreasstargard

south_africa

AfricanAntitrust.com editor John Oxenham recently published a terrific summary of the latest developments in the ZA cartel sphere.

A teaser introduction is below.  His detailed article can be found here (PDF).
John Oxenham, editor
John Oxenham, AAT editor

The past 18 months have witnessed significant developments in the investigation and prosecution of cartel conduct in South African competition law.  In summary, these developments are the following:

• The Supreme Court of Appeal recognised the availability of ‘opt
out’ class actions for private damages and set out a procedure
through which plaintiffs can seek certification of a class.
• The Constitutional Court extended the availability of class actions
for private damages by recognising ‘opt-in’ class actions
where the interests of justice permit such a procedure.
• The Competition Commission (the Commission) for the first
time utilised a fast-track settlement process in relation to the
prosecution of a widespread cartel in the construction industry.
• An amendment to the Competition Act, 89 of 1998 (the Act)
was promulgated giving the Commission the power to institute
market enquiries. The Commission has indicated that it wishes
to conduct a market inquiry into the private health-care sector.
• The Supreme Court of Appeal broadened the scope for the
Competition Tribunal (the Tribunal) to adjudicate complaints
prosecuted by the Commission.
• The Supreme Court of Appeal confirmed that leniency applications
submitted to the Commission by a leniency applicant are
subject to legal privilege unless the Commission makes reference
to the application in a complaint referral to the Tribunal
– in which case it will be taken to have waived privilege.
• The North Gauteng High Court found that a leniency applicant
is not protected from private damages claims – even where it
is not cited by the Commission as a respondent in complaint
proceedings brought before the Tribunal.

The article originally appeared in The African and Middle Eastern Antitrust Review 2014, which is published by Global Competition Review and is available online at: http://globalcompetitionreview.com/reviews/59/the-african-middle-eastern-antitrust-review-2014

NB: AfricanAntitrust.com author and economist Patrick Smith recently also published an article in the same edition of the Review, see: Public Interest Factors in African Competition Policy.