Legal updates and opinions
News / News
Take note and prepare to comment – Proposed Amendments to the COMESA Competition Regulations
and Chiara Ferri, Candidate Attorney
On 24 January 2024, the COMESA Competition Commission (“CCC”) published its Draft COMESA Competition and Consumer Protection Regulations (“Draft Regulations”). COMESA competition law is aiming to keep pace with current market developments with various regulations being amended and replaced. Written comments on the Draft Regulations by stakeholders are due by 14 February 2024. It is therefore crucial to consider some of the most noteworthy proposed amendments and what effect these changes may have for organisations in the current competition arena.
Determination of Dominance
The Draft Regulations seek to amend the CCC’s current determination of dominance. For example, the Draft Regulations specifically provide that if an undertaking holds a market share of at least 30% in the relevant market, it will be presumed to be dominant. In addition, it is stipulated that in determining whether an undertaking is dominant, consideration must be given to a host of factors, the most notable of which are –
- relevant market defined in terms of the product and the geographic context;
- barriers to entry, expansion and exit;
- history of competition and rivalry between competitors in the sector of activity;
- level of actual or potential competition in terms of number and size of competitors; and
- production capacity and product demand.
Draft Regulations Binding Member States
The Draft Regulations stipulate that Member States are precluded from relying on their own national laws where competition related conduct is covered under the CCC Regulations. The Draft Regulations seek to reinforce the notion that COMESA must be a one-stop-shop and therefore curtails the duplication of enforcement between national competition authorities and COMESA.
Transaction Value Threshold
Another proposed introduction in the Draft Regulations is that mergers in the digital market industry, which exceed a specified transaction value, must be notified to the CCC. The Draft Regulations neglect to define what a digital market industry is and it therefore remains unclear as to whether there are different thresholds for various markets.
Public Interest Grounds
The introduction of specific public interest grounds also form part of the Draft Regulations. If these are implemented, merging parties ought to be cognizant that the CCC will pay equal attention to public interest as it will to competition considerations.
Abuse of Dominance
On a final note, the Draft Regulations maintain the Current Regulations’ approach which treats abuse of dominance as an outright prohibition. This rigid stance runs the risk of ignoring nuanced market dynamics. This could hinder legitimate conduct which may enhance efficiency and benefit consumers. In the comings days, practitioner workshops will be held to discuss and comment on the CCC’s Draft Regulations. For access to the Draft Regulations, please click here.
Latest News
Pro Bono Articles
Five tips to optimise your first consultation with an attorney Coercive and Controlling Behaviour in the Domestic Violence Act [...]
FAQ – Opportunities for investors arising from the South African business rescue process
DOWNLOAD THE FAQ GUIDE HERE The South African business rescue process has created the opportunity for investors (local and [...]
Raging against the machine
and Thembelihle Tshabalala, Candidate Attorney, The meteoric rise of artificial intelligence (AI) is generating infinite possibilities and particularly so [...]
Additional obligations on accountable institutions
Following on the recent amendments to the Financial Intelligence Centre Act, 38 of 2001 ("FICA") and most notably, the [...]
The proper interpretation of conflicting provisions in the Income Tax Act
and Luke Magerman, Candidate Attorney A recent tax court judgment added valuable jurisprudence to the often-litigated issue of the interpretation [...]
What is the relevance of s 52 of the MPRDA on retrenchments in terms of section 189 and 189A in the mining industry?
In National Union of Mineworkers v Anglo American Platinum Ltd & others (Amplats), on 15 January 2013, Amplats had [...]