Skip to main content

SAB wins decade-long distribution case again

| Supplier news

The Competition Commission's decade-long distribution case against brewer SAB has been thwarted once again‚ this time by the Competition Appeal Court.

The commission's appeal was dismissed with costs in a judgment handed down in Cape Town on Monday‚ 2 February 2015, meaning its last option would be an appeal at the Constitutional Court.

Competition commissioner Thembinkosi Bonakele said "we haven't decided yet" whether or not to refer the case to SA's highest court.

The Competition Commission was appealing against the Competition Tribunal's decision last year not to abolish SAB's exclusive territorial agreements with its 13 appointed distributors.

While 90% of SAB's distribution is done through its own depots‚ the remaining 10% is done through appointed distributors across the country.

This portion has been under the spotlight since a complaint was made by an independent liquor distributor in 2004.

Long delays followed the referral of the case in 2007 to the tribunal‚ mainly due to procedural challenges put up by SAB.

Its first successful attempt to get the case dismissed was put on ice when the commission appealed to the tribunal.

When the case's dismissal was upheld by the tribunal‚ the commission took the next step in the process by turning to the Competition Appeal Court.

Lara Granville‚ a director at law firm Norton Rose Fulbright‚ which represented the appointed distributors‚ said the decision provided "welcome clarity for dominant firms in SA regarding how they choose to structure their distribution".

She said there had been‚ until now‚ uncertainty about how competition law should view a company that distributed its own product and also appointed external distributors.

"The issue was whether that raises price-fixing or market allocation concerns. The Competition Appeal Court has now clarified that these arrangements need not be considered as automatically illegal."

The Competition Appeal Court found that the commission had failed to prove that SAB's distribution arrangements were anticompetitive in that they inflated prices or reduced service levels.

The commission's case is based on price discrimination‚ market allocation and retail price maintenance.

The commission has argued that SAB had appointed distributors and given them exclusive territories in which to distribute its products‚ thus restricting competition between the various appointed distributors.

Pin It

Related Articles

Veggie victory as Joburg High Court sets aside ...

By: Sarene Kloren - IOL Lifestyle A new ruling by the South Gauteng High Court in Joburg has overturned an interim interdict to forestall and prevent the seizure of plant-based meat alternatives from South African retail shelves.

Benylin Paediatric Syrup recalled, investigatio...

By: Given Majola – IOL Business Report The SA Health Products Regulatory Authority (Sahpra) together with the South African manufacturer of Benylin Paediatric Syrup – Kenvue (formerly Johnson & Johnson) – have recalled two batches of the coug...

Tiger Brands invests in a multi-million-rand Pe...

Black Cat, South Africa’s most loved peanut butter brand, has a new home following a R300-million capital investment by Tiger Brands. The new peanut butter manufacturing facility is in Chamdor, Krugersdorp, on Johannesburg’s West Rand.

Eskom price hikes are here — How much more cust...

By: Hanno Labuschagne - MyBroadband Eskom’s latest tariff hikes will see many direct residential customers paying between R168 and R792 more per month on their electricity bills.

Take heed of these new retail trends that emerg...

By Karen Keylock | National Retail Services Manager at Nedbank Commercial Banking South African consumers are under financial strain and, consequently, the way they shop has changed. And with further economic uncertainty expected in the coming ye...