Competition regulation for digital markets: The South African experience

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.23962/ajic.i31.16013

Keywords:

digital markets, competition, regulation, mergers, abuse of dominance, cartel conduct, South Africa

Abstract

The study examines the recent experiences of South Africa’s competition authorities in engaging with competition matters in the country’s digital markets. Specifically, the authors examine engagements by the Competition Commission South Africa (CCSA), the Competition Tribunal of South Africa, and the Competition Appeal Court (CAC) with three regulatory elements: (1) mergers, examined through the MIH and WeBuyCars and Google and Fitbit cases; (2) abuse of dominance, examined through the GovChat v Facebook case; and (3) cartel conduct, examined through the Competition Commission v Bank of America Merrill Lynch International Limited & Others case. In reviewing the decisions made in these cases, the authors highlight regulatory considerations that are coming to the fore in response to competition matters in digital markets.

References

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC). (2019). Digital Platforms Inquiry: Final report. https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/Digital%20platforms%20inquiry%20-%20final%20report.pdf

Ademuyiwa, I. & Adeniran, A. (2020). Assessing digitalisation and data governance issues in Africa. Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI). https://www.cigionline.org/documents/1767/no244_0.pdf

Competition Commission South Africa (CCSA). (2017, February 15). Competition Commission prosecutes banks (currency traders) for collusion. [Press release.] http://www.compcom.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Competition-Commission-prosecutes-banks-currency-traders-for-collusion-15-Feb-2016.pdf

CCSA. (2020a). Competition in the digital economy: Version 2. http://www.compcom.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Digital-Markets-Paper-2021-002-1.pdf

CCSA. (2020b, December 22). Competition Commission conditionally approves the Google/Fitbit merger. [Media release.] http://www.compcom.co.za/wp-content/ uploads/2020/12/Competition-Commission-conditionally-approves-the-Google-Fitbit-merger.pdf

CCSA. (2020c, June 2). Competition Commission refers its case against banks for Rand manipulation to the Tribunal for prosecution. [Media release.] https://www.compcom.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Competition-commission-refers-its-case-against-banks-for-rand-manipulation-to-the-tribunal-for-prosecution.pdf

CCSA. (2021a). Online Intermediation Platforms Market Inquiry: Statement of issues. https://www.compcom.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/OIPMI-Statement-of-Issues_May-2021.pdf

CCSA. (2021b). Notification to approve with conditions the transaction involving: Google LLC (USA) and Fitbit Inc. (USA). Case Number: 2020sep0045. https://www.gov.za/sites/default/files/gcis_document/202110/45250gon968.pdf

CCSA. (2022a, March 14). Facebook prosecuted for abusing its dominance. [Media release.] https://www.compcom.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/FACEBOOK-PROSECUTED-FOR-ABUSING-ITS-DOMINANCE.pdf

CCSA. (2022b). Online Intermediation Platforms Market Inquiry: Provisional summary report. https://www.compcom.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/OIPMI-Provisional-Summary-Report.pdf

CCSA. (2022c). Final Guidelines on Small Merger Notification. https://www.compcom.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Guidelines-on-small-merger-notification.pdf

Competition Commission of South Africa v Bank of America Merrill Lynch International Limited and Others (CR121Feb17) [2019] ZACT 50; [2020] 1 CPLR 205 (CT) (12 June 2019).

Competition Commission v Bank of America Merrill Lynch International Limited and Others (175/CAC/Jul19) [2020] ZACAC 1; 2020 (4) SA 105 (CAC); [2020] 1 CPLR 26 (CAC) (28 February 2020).

Competition Tribunal of South Africa. (2021, March 25). Tribunal grants GovChat, #Letstalk interim relief against WhatsApp and Facebook. [Press release.] https://www.comptrib.co.za/info-library/case-press-releases/tribunal-grants-govchat-letstalk-interim-relief-against-whatsapp-and-facebook

Competition Tribunal of South Africa. (2023, March 30).Tribunal rules that it has jurisdiction to hear the “forex cartel case” against foreign and local banks. [Press release.] https://www.comptrib.co.za/info-library/case-press-releases/tribunal-rules-that-it-has-jurisdiction-to-hear-the-forex-cartel-case-against-foreign-and-local-banks

Coyle, D., Diepeveen, S., Wdowin, J., Kay, L., & Tennison, J. (2020). The value of data – Policy implications. Bennett Institute for Public Policy, University of Cambridge; and Open Data Institute. https://www.bennettinstitute.cam.ac.uk/publications/value-data-policy-implications

Da Silva, F., & Núñez, G. (2021). Free competition in the post-pandemic digital era: The impact on SMEs. Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), United Nations.

Department of Economic Development. (2021). Online Intermediation Platforms Market Inquiry: Terms of reference. Government Gazette No. 44432. https://www.gov.za/sites/default/files/gcis_document/202104/44432gon330.pdf

Google and Alphabet v Commission (Google Shopping) (2021). T-612/17. Google LLC and Alphabet Inc v European Commission (2018). T-604/18. Google LLC and Fitbit Inc (2020). 2020Sep0045.

GovChat (Pty) Ltd, Hashtag Letstalk (Pty) Ltd v Facebook Inc., WhatsApp Inc., Facebook SA (Pty) Ltd (2020). Order IR165Nov20. Competition Tribunal of South Africa.

Kelly, L., Unterhalter, D., Goodman, I., Smith, P., & Youens, P. (2016). Principles of competition law in South Africa. (1st ed.). Oxford University Press.

Khan, L. M. (2017). Amazon’s antitrust paradox. Yale Law Journal, 126(3), 710–805.

Maihaniemi, B. (2020). Competition law and big data: Imposing access to information in digital markets. Edward Elgar. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788974264

MIH eCommerce Holdings Pty Ltd t/a OLX South Africa and WeBuyCars Pty Ltd (2020): Reasons for decision. Case No. LM183Sep18. Competition Tribunal of South Africa. https://www.comptrib.co.za/case-detail/8539

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2018) Implications of e-commerce for competition policy. https://www.oecd.org/daf/competition/implications-of-e-commerce-for-competition-policy-2018.pdf

OECD. (2020). Abuse of dominance in digital markets. https://www.oecd.org/daf/competition/abuse-of-dominance-in-digital-markets-2020.pdf

PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC). (2023). Global top 100 companies – by market capitalisation. https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/audit-services/publications/top100/pwc-global-top-100-companies-2023.pdf

Shelanski, H. A. (2013). Information, innovation and competition policy for the internet. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 161(6), 1663–1705.

UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). (2019). Competition issues in the digital economy. TD/B/C.I/CLP/54. https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/ciclpd54_en.pdf

UNCTAD. (2021). Digital economy report 2021: Cross-border data flows and development: For whom the data flow. UNCTAD/DER/2021. https://unctad.org/publication/digital-economy-report-2021

US House of Representatives. (2022). Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial and Administrative Law of the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives. Investigation of Competition in Digital Markets. Majority Staff Report and Recommendations (117 Congress 2d Session). U.S. Government Publishing Office.

Downloads

Published

30-06-2023

How to Cite

Gumede, S. and Manenzhe, P. (2023) “Competition regulation for digital markets: The South African experience”, The African Journal of Information and Communication (AJIC). South Africa, (31). doi: 10.23962/ajic.i31.16013.

Issue

Section

Research Articles