Competition Authorities look closely at transactions which increase likelihood for information exchange

5 Feb 2013 2 min read Article

There is an increasing tendency by the South African competition authorities to look closely at transactions in which the potential for the dissemination of competitively sensitive information between firms is heightened. This is according to Lerisha Naidu, senior associate in the Competition practice at Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr.

“On 23 January 2013, the Competition Tribunal issued its reasons in the large merger involving Absa Bank (Absa) and the Private Label Store Card Portfolio of Edcon ((Edcon), in which the Tribunal approved the transaction subject to conditions designed to minimise the potential for coordinated effects post-merger,” Naidu explains. 

Naidu says that pre-merger, certain business activities supplied by the merging parties, namely those relating to the provision of unsecured credit, were found to horizontally overlap. 

“This was because Absa is party to a joint venture with Woolworths called Woolworths Financial Services (WFS), which offered certain types of unsecured credit products and that, post transaction, Absa would acquire the right, title and interest to the accounts and receivables relating to the Edcon portfolio (which offers substitutable products and services to WFS),” she says. 

Naidu notes that the Competition Commission regarded Absa's post-transaction interest in both WFS and the Edcon portfolio as a platform for collusion, which could facilitate the exchange of competitively sensitive information (such as pricing, marketing policies and commercial strategies) between Edcon and Woolworths through Absa, and could substantially prevent or lessen competition. 

“The Competition Tribunal agreed with the Commission's findings and imposed a set of behavioural conditions, pertaining to the implementation of ring-fencing measures designed to prevent anti-competitive information exchange, and monitoring conditions.

“In the decision of Business Venture Investments No. 1624 and another; and Waco African and another, similar conditions were imposed by the Tribunal to prevent the dissemination of competitively sensitive information within the acquiring group as regards its interests in competing scaffolding businesses, post-merger,” Naidu says. 

“In this light, it is important for acquiring firms, that seek to acquire interests in competing entities, to implement measures and to proactively adopt policies and procedures that ensure that the likelihood of information exchange post-transaction is obviated," she adds.

The information and material published on this website is provided for general purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. We make every effort to ensure that the content is updated regularly and to offer the most current and accurate information. Please consult one of our lawyers on any specific legal problem or matter. We accept no responsibility for any loss or damage, whether direct or consequential, which may arise from reliance on the information contained in these pages. Please refer to our full terms and conditions. Copyright © 2024 Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr. All rights reserved. For permission to reproduce an article or publication, please contact us