|
Tribunal confirms construction firm’s settlement with Commission and R6m fine
Local construction firm, GVK Siyazama Building Contractors (Cape) (Pty) Ltd, will pay an administrative penalty (a fine) of R6 038 852.00 after admitting to collusive tendering in three construction projects in the Western Cape.
The firm’s admission – and its agreement to pay the fine – forms part of a consent agreement it had concluded with the Commission. The agreement was confirmed as an order by the Tribunal earlier today.
In terms of the agreement, GVK admits that it colluded on projects involving the construction of a Mediclinic hospital in Brackenville, in Cape Town; alterations to and an extension of the Tygervalley Mall; and the construction of a warehouse and office buildings in Cape Town.
The Commission said its investigation revealed that GVK had colluded with Group Five in 2008 in respect of the Mediclinic Group tender; that it had tendered collusively with Neil Muller Construction (NMC) in 2010, in relation to the Tygervalley shopping mall; and that it had also colluded with NMC in 2010 on a tender for the construction of a new warehouse and office building project.
More specifically, the Commission alleged that GVK had been provided with cover prices by Group Five and NMC in respect of the tenders.
In addition to GVK’s admission and its agreement to pay the fine, the firm will implement and monitor a competition law compliance programme.
Palaeofin acquires SVF and CenCap
The Tribunal has approved the large merger in which Palaeofin (Pty) Ltd (Palaeofin) seeks to acquire Southern View Finance SA Holdings (Pty) Ltd (SVF) and Century Capital (Pty) Ltd (CenCap).
Palaeofin is wholly owned and controlled by Titan Investments (Pty) Ltd.
Both of the target firms are jointly controlled by Cream Magenta 140 (Pty) Ltd and MetCap 14 (Pty) Ltd. SVF is an investment firm whose activities are limited to holding loan claims against Wands Investments (Pty) Ltd, on which SVF earns interest. CenCap is an unsecured lender involved in the provision of unsecured lending to customers making purchases of movable goods.
In its assessment of the merger, the Commission was of the view that the transaction did not raise any competition concerns, as it found no horizontal overlap between the activities of the merging parties. In addition, the proposed transaction does not raise any public interest concerns. The Tribunal has approved the merger without conditions.
|
