Damages Arising from Contraventions of Competition Act 89 of 1998

Keywords: Competition law, Damages, Private Competition Damages, Delictual, Statutory

Abstract

Persons who have suffered loss or damage as a result of a prohibited practice in terms of the Competition Act 89 of 1998 (the Act) have the right to recover such damage in the civil courts. This right is expressly provided for in section 65 of the Act. To date South Africa has failed to usher in an efficient and effective environment for section 65 civil damages actions, despite growing success being achieved by the competition authorities in uncovering and prosecuting firms for contraventions of the Act, including prohibited practices. Understanding how section 65 rights might be vindicated and whether South Africa's damages regime is adequate to deal with potentially complex damages actions within the realm of competition law contraventions, a starting point would be to gain certainty as to the classification of the nature of section 65 damages. This article seeks to evaluate the arguments of whether these damages actions should be properly classified as statutory or delictual actions by the South African civil courts.

 

GS7.png

References

A

Agri Wire (Pty) Ltd and Another v Commissioner of the Competition Commission and Others [2012] 4 All SA 365 (SCA).

American Natural Soda Corporation v Competition Commissioner 2003 5 SA 633 (CAC)

Atlas Organic Fertilizers (Pty) Ltd v Pikkewyn Ghwano (Pty) Ltd 1981 (2) SA 173 (T)


B

Bastian Financial Services (Pty) Ltd v General Hendrik Schoeman Primary School 2008 (5) SA 1 (SCA)

Bato Star Fishing (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Environmental Affairs & Others 2004 (4) SA 490 (CC)

Bester v Calitz 1982 3 SA 864 (O)

Bredell v Pienaar 1924 CPD 203

Brenner v Botha 1956 (3) SA 257 (T)


C

Children’s Resource Centre and others v Pioneer Food and Others 2013 (2) SA 213 (SCA)

Competition Commission v Pioneer Foods 15/CR/Feb07.
Available at http://www.comptrib.co.za/cases/complaint/retrieve_case/1120

Coronation Brick (Pty) Ltd v Strachan Construction Co (Pty) Ltd 1982 (4) SA 371 (D)


D

Dadoo Ltd and Others v Krugersdorp Municipal Council 1920 AD

Da Silva v Coutinho 1971 (3) SA 123 (A)



Dun and Bradstreet (Pty) Ltd v SA Merchants Combined Credit Bureau (Cape) (Pty) Ltd 1968 (1) SA 209 (C)



E

EC Press Release, Antitrust: Commission proposes legislation to facilitate damage claims by victims of antitrust violations, dated 11 June 2013. Available at http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-13-525_en.htm.

Evins v Shield Insurance Company Limited 1980 (2) SA 814 (A).


F

Fedlife Assurance Ltd v Wolfaardt (2002) SA 49 SA (SCA)


Franschoekse Wynkelder (Ko-op) Bpk v SAR & H 1981 (3) SA 421 (SCA)



G

Geary & Son (Pty) Ltd v Gove 1964 (1) SA 434 (A)


Greenfield Engineering Works (Pty) Ltd v NKR Construction (Pty) Ltd 1978 (4) SA 901 (N)


H

Hovenkamp, Quantification of Harm in Private Antitrust Actions in the United States, February 2011. Available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1758751

I

International Tobacco Company Limited v United Tobacco Company Limited (1) 1955 (2) SA 1 (W)


L

Lascon Properties (Pty) Ltd v Wadeville Investment Co (Pty) Ltd 1998 (4) SA 578 (W)

Lillicrap, Wassenaar and Partners v Pilkington Brothers SA (Pty) Ltd 1985 (1) SA 475 (A).


M

Matthews v Young 1922 AD 492.

Minister of Safety and Security v Carmichele 2004 (3) SA 305 (SCA)

Minister van Veiligheid en Sekuritiet v Geldenhuys 2004 (1) SA 515 (SCA) 531-532.

Minister of Safety and Security v Hamilton 2004 (2) SA 216 (SCA)

Minister of Safety and Security v Van Duivenboden 2002 (6) SA 431 (SCA)

Moaki v Reckitt and Colman (Africa) Ltd 1988 (4) SA 63 (D)

Mukaddam and Others v Pioneer Foods (Pty) Ltd and Others 2013 (2) SA 254 (SCA).

Mukaddam and Others v Pioneer Foods (Pty) Ltd and Others [2013] ZACC 23 (CC)


N

Neelie Kroes. Enhancing actions for damages for breach of competition rules in Europe. Dinner speech at the Harvard Club, New York, 22 September 2005. Available at http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-05-533_en.htm. (Last accessed on 8 November 2012.)

Niels, Jenkins & Kavanagh, Economics for Competition Lawyers, Oxford Press (2011)

Nino’s Coffee Bar & Restaurant CC v Nino’s Italian Coffee & Sandwich Bar CC, Nino’s Italian Coffee & Sandwich Bar CC v Nino’s Coffee Bar & Restaurant CC 1998 (3) SA 656 (C)


O

Official Journal of the European Union (2013/C 167/07)
Available at http://kartellblog.de/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013-Communication-from-the-Commission-on-quantifying-harm-in-actions-for-damages.pdf



P

Patz v Greene 1907 TS 427

Perlman v Zoutendyk 1934 CPD 151

Philip Collins, Chairman Office of Fair Trading public and private enforcement challenges and opportunities, Speech to the Law Society’s European Group, 6 June 2006. Available at www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/speeches/0306.pdf.

Premier Foods (Pty) Ltd v Manoim NO and Others (38235/2012) [2013] ZAGPPHC 236

Public Carriers Association and Others v Toll Road Concessionaries (Pty) Ltd and Others 1990 (1) SA 925 (A)


R

Road Accident Fund v Russell 2001 (2) SA 34 (SCA)


S


SAD Holdings v South African Raisins 2000 3 SA 766 (T)

Seagram Africa (Pty) Ltd v Stellenbosch Farmers’ Winery 2001 2 SA 1129 (C)

Siman and Co (Pty) Ltd v Barclays National Bank Ltd 1984 (2) SA 888 (A)

Simon Vande Walle, Deterrence of Antitrust Violations:
Do Actions for Damages Matter in Japan? Available at http://www.sef.hku.hk/aslea2011/private/paper/19.%20Simon%20Vande%20Walle%20final%20full%20paper.pdf

Slims (Pty) Ltd v Morris 1988 (1) SA 715 (A)

Smit v Abrahams 1992 (3) SA 158 (C) 162 (1994 (4) SA 1 (A)

South African Raisins (Pty) Ltd and Another v SAD Holdings Ltd and Another (case No 176/2000) [unreported judgment 20 September 2000]

Standard Bank of South Africa Ltd v Coetsee 1981 (1) SA 1131 (A)
Steenkamp NO v Provincial Tender Board, Eastern Cape 2006 (3) SA 151 (SCA) Olitzki Property Holdings v State Tender Board and Another 2001 (3) SA 1247 (SCA)

Standard Bank Investment Corporation Ltd v Competition Commission & Others; Liberty Life Association of Africa Ltd v Competition Commission & Others 2000 (2) SA 797 (SCA)

Steyn, Uitleg van Wette, Juta (1981) 97.

Sutherland & Kemp, Competition Law of South Africa, Issue 15, 2012, LexisNexis


T

The Trustees for the time being for the Children's Resource Centre Trust and Others v Pioneer Foods (Pty) Ltd (25302/10, 25353/10) [2011] ZAWCHC 102 (7 April 2011).


Thoroughbred Breeders’ Association v Price Waterhouse 2001 (4) SA 551 (SCA)


U

Universitiet van Pretoria v Tommie Meyer Films (Edms) Bpk 1977 4 SA 376 (T)

University of Cape Town v Cape Bar Council and Another 1986 (4) SA 903 (A)


V

Van der Walt & Midgley, Principles of Delict, LexisNexis Butterworths (2005)

Van Eeden v Minister of Safety and Security (Women’s legal centre Trust as amicus curiae) 2003 (1) SA 398 (SCA)

Van Heerden & Neethling, Unlawful Competition, LexisNexis (2008).

Visser, Potgieter, Steynberg and Floyd, Law of Damages, 3rd Edition, Juta (2012).


W

William Grant and Sons Ltd v Cape Wine Distillers Ltd 1990 (3) SA 897 (C)
Views
  • Abstract 166
  • pdf 127
  • xml 8
  • epub 2
Views and downloads are with effect from 11 January 2018
Published
2019-06-13
Section
Articles