Panel
:
N Manoim (Presiding
Member), Y Carrim (Tribunal
Member), and M Mokuena (Tribunal Member)
Heard on
:
8 December 2006
Decided on
:
8 December 2006 Reasons Issued:
18 December 2006
Reasons for Decision
Approval
[1]
On 8 December 2006 the Tribunal issued a merger clearance certificate unconditionally approving the merger between Dipula Property
Investment Trust and Outward Investment (Pty) Ltd. The reasons for approving the transaction follow.
The Parties
[2]
The primary acquiring firm is Dipula Property Investment Trust (‘Dipula Trust’), a trust formed in accordance with the
laws of South Africa. Dipula Trust is a newly formed entity that is controlled by its trustee, Dipula Property Fund (‘Dipula
Fund’), also a newly formed entity. Both Dipula Trust and Dipula Fund are currently not trading. Dipula Fund is jointly controlled
by Dijalo Property Services (Pty) Ltd (‘Dijalo’) and Redefine Income Fund Limited (‘Redefine’) with 51% and
49% respective interests in Dipula Fund. No single firm controls Redefine.
[3]
The primary target firm comprises the immovable properties and property letting enterprises conducted in respect of such properties
owned by Outward Investment (Pty) Ltd (‘Outward’), a wholly owned subsidiary of Redefine.
Rationale for the transaction
[4]
Both Redefine and Djjalo view the proposed transaction as an opportunity to create a black majority owned property fund.
The Transaction
[5]
This transaction involves the acquisition as a going concern by Dipula Trust of various properties owned by Outward. Dijalo and Redefine
will initially form the Dipula Trust, which will be used as a special purpose vehicle for the acquisition of the acquired properties. The properties are acquired in one indivisible transaction.
[6]
The end result of the transaction is that Dipula Trust will own and control the acquired properties. Dijalo and Redefine will have
51% and 49% respective interests in Dipula Fund, the ultimate controller of Dipula Trust. The following are the pre and post-merger
structures:
The parties’ activities
The Primary Acquiring Firm
Dipula Trust
[7]
Dipula Trust is a newly incorporated entity that, together with its newly incorporated trustee, Dipula Fund, has not commenced trading.
Dijalo
[8]
Dijalo, one of the ultimate controllers of Dipula Trust in terms of this merger, is involved in property management services but does
not own any properties.
Redefine
[9]
Redefine, one of the ultimate controllers of Dipula Trust in terms of this merger, is a major property investment fund that owns and
lets office, retail and industrial properties.
The primary target firm
[10]
Outward, a wholly owned subsidiary of Redefine, is involved in the provision rentable grade A office space, retail space and industrial
space.
Overlapping activities
[11]
In their papers, the parties submitted that there is an overlap in the activities of the merging parties. However, at the hearing
they conceded that there is no real overlap since Redefine owns 100% of the properties prior to this transaction and is now selling
them and will consequently own 49% via Dipula Trust. Indeed, a careful analysis of the current transaction leaves one with the inescapable conclusion that there is no overlap because
this transaction involves the introduction of two new entities namely Dipula Fund and Dipula Trust in certain commercial property
letting business of the Redefine Group owned by Outward. These entities do not own or control any property owning and letting enterprises.
Dijalo, one of the ultimate owners of Dipula Trust, is involved in property management and does not own or control the properties
it administers. The only property portfolio that is of essence for the purposes of the current transaction is the one housed in and
being acquired from Outward. As a result there is no horizontal product overlap in the activities of the parties.
[12]
This transaction gives rise to vertical integration in that Dijalo is involved in the property management business and Dipula Trust
will be involved in the upstream activity of ownership and letting of properties. The Commission defined the market as the national
market for the provision of property management services. It is not necessary to analyse the market in this instance since Dijalo
has less than 1% market share. This percentage is small and does not raise competition concerns. Furthermore, there are other major
property management services companies that will continue competing with the merging firms post-merger. These include, among others,
Broll Property services, Gensec, JH Isaacs, Colliers, RMB Properties
Public Interest Issues
[13]
There are no public interest issues.
Conclusion
[14]
The transaction will not lead to a substantial prevention or lessening of competition and is accordingly approved. Moreover, there
are no public interest concerns that may affect this conclusion.
________________
18 December 2006
N Manoim
DATE
Tribunal Member
Y Carrim and M Mokuena concur in the judgment of N Manoim.
Tribunal Researcher:
R Kariga
For the merging parties:
J Katz, Edward Nathan Sonnenbergs Attorneys
For the Commission
:
F Ngobese and H Ratshisusu (Mergers
and
Acquisitions)
SAFLII:
|Terms of Use|Feedback
URL: http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZACT/2006/95.html
.RTF of original document