Contact

Vodacom - Data market inquiry and various complaints

Back to top

Vodacom - Data market inquiry and various complaints

Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr is representing Vodacom, the leading South Africa-based mobile communications company.

24 May 2018 1 min read Featured work

Our client is one of the main stakeholders in the spotlight of Competition Commission's on-going market inquiry into the price of data. The inquiry is intended to be completed by August 2018 and has attracted significant publicity under the hashtag Data Must Fall. Our competition team, together with a global team of economic experts, made submissions to the Commission. The Inquiry is related to ICASA's priority market inquiry in the broader telecoms industry. Our team also represented Vodacom in its successful opposition of the Cell C complaint regarding on-net/off-net differentials, which was non-referred. In addition, we represent Vodacom in relation to the Competition Commission's investigation into its roaming agreement with RAIN. We also perform advisory and compliance work for Vodacom regarding Competition Act matters.

You might also be interested in

26 Mar 2024

by Natasha Fletcher and Tyler Lillienfeldt

Your neighbour may take legal ownership of your property because of a boundary fence

In the decision of Burglar Alarm & Remote Control Services CC v Werner Brits 8917/2019 , the High Court in the Western Cape granted an application in which the plaintiff’s request, brought in terms of the Prescription Act 18 of 1943 and the Prescription Act 68 of 1969, sought to acquire a strip of land by way of acquisitive prescription.

Real Estate Law

3 min read

17 Oct 2023

by Corné Lewis

The SCA reconfirms the restrictions of a court where a substitution order is sought in administrative decisions

In The Municipal Manager: The City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality and Others v San Ridge Heights Rental Property (Pty) Ltd (517/2022) ZASCA 109 the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) was confronted with a case in which the owner of a property exhausted all internal remedies before launching a review application; the review application was launched timeously; and even after the launch of an internal appeal, the City of Johannesburg (Municipality) had failed to file reasons for its decisions. In this article, we will explore the principles established by the SCA and their broader implications.

Dispute Resolution

2 min read

28 Aug 2023

by Jean Ewang

Taking liberties: Unmasking of an employee’s sick leave trickery

In the recent judgment of SARS v Benneth Mathebula and Others (JR 2243/21) ZALCJHB 222 (21 July 2023) the Labour Court was called upon to reconsider the fairness, or otherwise, of Mr Mathebula’s dismissal from the South African Revenue Service (SARS) due to his dishonesty regarding his sick leave.

Employment Law

4 min read

23 Oct 2023

by Jean Ewang and Thato Makoaba

Automatically unfair dismissal for refusing to take the COVID-19 vaccine? The Labour Court’s first decision

The law regarding automatically unfair dismissals is trite and has been tested by our courts on various occasions. Recently, however, in the case of Burton Maasdorp v University of Free State JS647/2022 , the Labour Court handed down the first decision regarding an automatically unfair dismissal claim resulting from an employee’s refusal to adhere to a workplace COVID-19 vaccination policy. 

Employment Law

3 min read

13 Sep 2023

BRP take the wheel: The effect of business rescue proceedings on directors

One of the areas of uncertainty which is often raised by individuals and entities alike when it comes to business rescue proceedings, is that of the division of function and duty between a duly appointed business rescue practitioner (BRP) and a company’s board of directors.

Business Rescue, Restructuring & Insolvency

4 min read

24 Jul 2023

by Vivien Chaplin, John Gillmer, Haafizah Khota and Menachem Gudelsky

New accountable institutions beware: Deadline ahead for submission of a risk and compliance return

On 31 March 2023 the Financial Intelligence Centre (FIC) issued Directive 7 in terms of section 43A(3)(a) of the Financial Intelligence Centre Act 28 of 2001 (FIC Act). Directive 7 makes it mandatory for a specified list of accountable institutions to submit a risk and compliance return to the FIC by 17h00 on 31 July 2023.  

2 min read

This website uses cookies to enhance the browsing experience. For more information, please see our Cookie Policy.

Accept Decline