Loading...

Continental Tyres South Africa (Pty) Ltd and Goodyear South Africa (Pty) Ltd vs Competition Commission, Apollo Tyres South Africa (Pty) Ltd, Bridgestone South Africa (Pty) Ltd, South African Tyre Manufacturers Conference (Pty) Ltd (156/CAC/Nov17 & 157/CAC/Nov17) [2018] ZACAC (12 October 2018)

The first is a judgment of the Competition Appeal Court which deals with the vexed question of litigation privilege and pronounces on what is required in order to sustain a claim to litigation privilege of a document or information. It says it is not enough simply to assert that a document or information was obtained in the course of preparing for litigation that is pending; facts to that effect must also be established.

Full Judgment here

By |2019-02-08T12:09:33+02:00Feb 5th, 2019|Cases of Interest, Competition, Judgements, South Africa|Comments Off on Continental Tyres South Africa (Pty) Ltd and Goodyear South Africa (Pty) Ltd vs Competition Commission, Apollo Tyres South Africa (Pty) Ltd, Bridgestone South Africa (Pty) Ltd, South African Tyre Manufacturers Conference (Pty) Ltd (156/CAC/Nov17 & 157/CAC/Nov17) [2018] ZACAC (12 October 2018)

Isipani Construction (Pty) Ltd v Competition Commission (144/CAC/Aug16CT, 019950) [2017] ZACAC 3 (14 September 2017)

TThis judgment deals with another vexed question of the appropriate administrative penalty where a firm or company has been found guilty of anti-competitive conduct. The issue is what the appropriate approach is in determining appropriate penalty.

Full Judgment here

By |2019-02-08T12:09:24+02:00Feb 4th, 2019|Cases of Interest, Competition, Judgements, South Africa|Comments Off on Isipani Construction (Pty) Ltd v Competition Commission (144/CAC/Aug16CT, 019950) [2017] ZACAC 3 (14 September 2017)