Competition's bite sharpens

Business as usual as Manoim takes over tribunal and Mastercard and Visa probed.

Khosie Thom
04 August 2009 13:01

The Competition Commission is serious about rooting out cartels and making sure that not even fools rush in where angels fear to tread.

Since the beginning of the year, the commission has launched more than ten investigations (see table) into various cartels. The commission initiated six cases in 2006/07 and ten in 2007/08 compared with 23 in 2008/09. New chairperson of the Competition Tribunal Norman Manoim told Moneyweb Radio, "One of the big things that has changed has been this commission's leniency policy which affects cartels."

This basically means that the first guy in the room who squeals gets off, as long as he tells on the others. "That has brought a whole lot of new cases through," he added. Nandi Mokoena, manager of strategy & stakeholder relations said, "While we cannot answer for the parties who lodge complaints with the commission, it is likely that a combination of factors lead to such an increase."

"For example, there is more awareness of the commission's work therefore more parties provide information to the commission," she added. Competition matters are being addressed more vigilantly by the commission ensuring an environment for fair competition and that consumers are protected.

Manoim said, "Our job is not to make it easier for people who are breaking the law, so we'll carry on business as usual."

Although the number of cartels being investigated has increased significantly, Mokoena said the commission also includes advocacy. This means it educates business about their rights and obligations in terms of the Competition Act, "we want businesses to comply". So the commission is not in the business of catching businesses out but getting them to comply.

Moreover, the commission has been making specific efforts to intervene in its priority sectors - with sector studies and advocacy. Hence the increase in the number of initiations, Mokoena added.

Manoim also told Moneyweb Radio  that the commission has got a number of cases but quite a lot of these cases actually get settled at commission level, and it's just a matter for the Competition Tribunal to supervise a consent order.

He explains that this means that people enter a plea and do a plea bargain. In other words they say: "Look, we'll plead guilty and we'll agree to this remedy." And it's then taken to the tribunal to see if that is a fair remedy in those circumstances; that obviates the need for going to trial. "It means the matter can be settled within a morning."

"To give another perspective though, that doesn't mean that every case that is being investigated is going to find a conviction at the end of the day," said Manoim.

According to Manoim, the tribunal is gathering momentum in the sense that it is getting more experience in running the procedures in the institution and how it should work. "Our biggest challenge at the moment is to hear cases more quickly. They are taking too long to get from where a complaint is lodged to finality," said Manoim.  He continued to say that it doesn't matter whether someone is eventually going to be found guilty or not or acquitted. "If cases are taking too long it's got an adverse effect on the market."

These have varied from price fixing in the bread industry to bike cartels that have gone bust.

Here is a look at the progress of the cases that have been initiated this year.

Industry

Companies involved

Contravention

Penalty

Outcome

Bread industry

Tiger Brands,  Premier Foods, Foodcorp and Pioneer Foods

price fixing and market allocation

Premier was granted conditional immunity and the commission reached settlement agreements with  Foodcorp for R45, 406, 359.82  and with Tiger Brands for

R98 784 869.90

Final arguments  are before the Tribunal

Construction

Rocla (M&R is its holding company), Southern Pipeline Contractors, Concrete Units, Infraset, Grallio, Cobro, Cape Concrete, Concrite Walls, Craig Concrete and D&D concrete

Price fixing, market allocation and collusive tendering  

 Commission has reached a settlement agreement with Aveng for R46 277 000

The Commission is engaged  in settlement negotiations with some of the respondents and will proceed in the Tribunal against those respondents with whom settlement is not reached

Industrial

•·    Sasol, Omnia and Yara (previously known as Kynoch)

 

•·    Sasol and Foskor

•·     Market allocation & price fixing

 

•·     Collusion

Commission settled both cases with Sasol for R250 680 000[K1] 

Omnia and Yara continue to deny the allegations in continuing proceedings before the Competition Tribunal

Industrial

•·    Sasol

•·     Abuse of dominance

 

Matter is before the Tribunal and settlement negotiations are underway

Milk industry

Lancewood, Clover SA, Parmalat, Ladismith Cheese, Woodlands Dairy, Nestle SA and Milkwood Dairy

Price fixing  and manipulation of markets

Settlement agreement reached with Lancewood is R100 000

Other parties are arguing their case in courts

Construction

Portland Cement Company (PPC),  Lafarge Industries South Africa(Lafarge), AfriSam Consortium (AfriSam and formally known as Holcim South Africa) and Natal Portland Cement Cimpor (NPC-Cimpor)‟

price fixing and market allocation, controlling or limiting the supply of cement extenders, and abuse of dominance by PPC aimed at foreclosing independent cement blenders

 

Still under investigation

Bicycle retailers

Fritz Pienaar Cycles and Cycle Lab(Andrew Mclean ) and other cycle retailers

 

 

Still under investigation

Plastic  pipe industry

DPI Plastics, Swan Plastics, Marley Pipes Systems, Petzetakis, Amitech South Africa, MacNeil Agencies, Flo-Tek Pipes,  Andrag and Gazelle Plastics

bid rigging, price fixing and market allocation

DPI has received conditional immunity

Matter has been referred to the Competition Tribunal for adjudication.  The Commission is engaged in settlement negotiations with some of the respondents 

Retailers

Pick n Pay, Shoprite/Checkers, Woolworths, Spar, Massmart and Metcash

Possible restrictive horizontal practices, restrictive vertical practices and abuse of dominance

 

Still under investigation

Construction

Murray & Roberts, Group Five, Grinaker-LTA, Wilson Bayly Holmes-Ovcon, Basil Read, Stefanutti Stocks, BAM International and Bouygues Construction

 

 

Still under investigation

Banking

Mastercard and Visa

 

 

Still under investigation

 
Write to Khosie Thom: khosie@moneyweb.co.za

 

 


 [K1]The original amount was R188 010 00 which was 6% of total turnover but the fine was increased to 8% after Sasol admitted fully to contravening Section 4(1)(b) of the Competition Act and identified additional related conduct that goes to the heart of the Commission's collusion case in the Nutri-Flo referral.



Print icon  Print story Email icon   Email story

Related Links

Articles:  Competition authorities hone in on offending parties
Transcripts:  Manoim replaces Lewis as Tribunal chair: Norman Manoim – new chairperson, Competition Tribunal


COMMENTS

View disclaimer
 
 responses to this article

Outcomes
When will the outcomes be cheaper bread, cement, etc.
Where is all this money going? What happened with the big 4 banks and charges?

by Clinton on August 04 2009, 13:57
Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Rocla
Aveng is not Rocla's parent company - Rocla is a subsidiary of Murray & Roberts.

by Error on August 04 2009, 14:07
Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Am I the only one who sees how dangerous this law is?
The leniency policy offers the losers in every market a great opportunity to f--k up the winners without having to compete commercially. How is this in the consumer's interest??

by Businessman on August 04 2009, 14:59
Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Benefits to consumers...
Will there ever really be any benefit to the consumers? Methinks not.
And why is there only ONE Competition Commission?

by Biggles flies undone on August 04 2009, 15:41
Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Competition Commission
What is happening to all the millions collected in fines and penalites.It is not translating to lowere prices.As far as cartels are concerned-pay the fine and business as usual.

by Kaddy on August 04 2009, 15:45
Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Fines
And the fines just goes into the kitty (not ringfenced for restitution) - so consumer gets ripped-off twice

by Anon on August 04 2009, 16:21
Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

the money
the competition commission I think works on commission...... A just penalty would be to force these offenders to lower the price for X amount of time, so that we the ones that have been fleeced, can benefit, and not the government. Also make the . .more

by Crazyed on August 04 2009, 17:32
Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Obviously the penalties are too low ....
as it would seem that it is business as usual after the fines have been imposed and the little guys are then invited to join the clan! There must be some scope here for some highly irregular BBEEE deals!!!!

by Zorba on August 04 2009, 17:50
Find this comment inappropriate? Report it

Rocla
The Murrays have their fingers in alot of pies it looks like not only the Selebi case or Ellies. but now this(Aveng is not Rocla's parent company - Rocla is a subsidiary of Murray & Roberts.)

by Jack on January 20 2010, 08:12
Find this comment inappropriate? Report it


Name
Subject
Comment

Similar articles

Articles with the same people

Articles with the same company

JSE TODAY
NEED MORE INFORMATION? Please leave your details and we'll get back to you. information supplied by Nedbank Online Share Trading
All Share
Daily indicators
Winners & Losers
All share
JSE Quickprice

Blogs

Felicity Duncan

The Iraq war is over

But Obama says US needs to deal with economic troubles at home.

The Investment Case - SABMiller

Are the brewer’s prospects enough to drive you to drink?

Tracey Swanepoel

Meetings: Work? Or just a waste of time?

Decision-free zones are drains on productivity.