7.
Post this transaction, BoEL will focus on credit life products and OMLACSA on general life
assurance products. The main object of the JV will be to sell credit protection assurance products to customers and clients of Nedcor
and its subsidiaries.
8.
However, there is provision in the MOU that “the JV will require consent by the Board
of Directors to sell credit protection products to parties other than customers and clients of Nedcor and its subsidiaries.”
The Tribunal was concerned that this could raise the possibility of foreclosure of other firms competing in credit and general life
from the Nedcor client base. However there is a panel of insurers in respect of all categories of credit life assurance comprising
competing firms such as Hollard Insurance Company Limited, Regent Life Assurance Company Limited and Pinnafrica Life Limited. Furthermore
section 44 of the Long Term Insurance Act mandates freedom of choice of a particular insurer. Therefore, Nedcor customers will have
a choice to buy life assurance from any provider other than BoE.
Public Interest
9.
The number of likely retrenchments as a result of the merger are estimated at 25 employees
and these are limited to skilled and semi-skilled employees.
Conclusion
This is an internal restructuring and there is no significant competitive change from the status quo. In any event, there is a very
insignificant accretion of market share in each case. We conclude that the merger will not lead to a substantial lessening of competition. There are no public interest concerns which would alter this conclusion for the reasons stated above. The merger is therefore approved
unconditionally.
_____________
4 February 2003
N. Manoim
Date
Concurring: D.Lewis, M. Holden
For the merging parties:
Edward Nathan Friedland Attorneys
For the Commission:
K. Ramathula, N. Barnabas, Competition Commission
SAFLII:
|
Terms of Use
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZACT/2003/6.html