Just Keep Pedaling Posted February 21, 2014 Posted February 21, 2014 Final Edition JudgmentsCorporate and Commercial Law :: Anti-competitive conductCompetition Commission v Pedaling Dynamics CC t/a Dunkeld Cycles [2014] JOL 31243 (CT) Case Number: 73 / CR / Jul12 Judgment Date: 30 / 05 / 2013 Country: South Africa Jurisdiction: Competition Tribunal Division: Bench: N Manoim PM, M Mokuena TM, I Valodia TM Keywords:Competition law – Anti-competitive conduct – Price-fixingMini Summary:In 2008, the Competition Commission received information from an anonymous source about meetings which allegedly took place in Cape Town and Gauteng between various cycling retailers and wholesalers. The commission was also provided with minutes of one such meeting. As a result, the commission initiated a complaint in terms of section 49B of the Competition Act 89 of 1998. Following its investigation, it concluded that the conduct by the respondent, together with other parties, constituted a contravention of section 4(1)(b)(i) of the act, in that they agreed, alternatively engaged in a concerted practice to directly or indirectly fix prices or other trading conditions.Held that in the present consent agreement submitted to the tribunal for confirmation, the respondent admitted that it had contravened section 4(1)(b)(i). It agreed to fully co-operate with the commission in relation to the prosecution of any other respondents who were the subject of its investigations and referral to the tribunal, and to provide whatever evidence it had in its possession. It also agreed to in future refrain from participating in meetings aimed at engaging in a cartel conduct which may lead to a possible contravention of section 4(1)(b). Finally, it undertook to send its management and directors on a competition law compliance training programme.The agreement, upon confirmation as an order by the tribunal, was entered into in full and final settlement and concluded all proceedings between the commission and the respondent relating to any alleged contravention by the respondents of the act that was the subject of the commission’s investigation. The agreement was confirmed.
Just Keep Pedaling Posted February 21, 2014 Author Posted February 21, 2014 hmm - I wonder if this is old news. Juta just sent me this so I assumed it was fresh but if I look at the dates its from June last year.
Sportsworld.co.za Posted February 23, 2014 Posted February 23, 2014 Well funny enough, when we applied to become an Omnico products dealer we were told, 'sorry we can't supply you because you work from your own premises and don't pay rent which gives you an unfair advantage'. ie, we could charge less if we wanted. Unfair or good business on their part?
fanievb Posted February 23, 2014 Posted February 23, 2014 hmm - I wonder if this is old news. Juta just sent me this so I assumed it was fresh but if I look at the dates its from June last year. There was a few topics on this the last 2 years, I just can't seem to find them
Overlord Posted February 23, 2014 Posted February 23, 2014 Question remains. What about all the customers that bought bikes or anything cycling related from the shops implicated in this? The law was broken and customers were taken advantage off for self gain. Somewhere the customer needs to be looked after.
Recommended Posts