Standard Bank of South Africa Real Equity Trust and Stellenbosch Vineyards Limited (51/LM/Jul02) [2002] ZACT 59 (23 October 2002)

60 Reportability
Competition Law

Brief Summary

Competition — Merger Approval — Merger between Standard Bank of South Africa and Stellenbosch Vineyards Limited — The Competition Tribunal approved the merger, noting that Standard Bank and Real Equity Trust would acquire 37.5% and 25% of SVL, respectively, while existing shareholders would retain 37.5% — The Tribunal found that the parties do not operate in the same relevant market, and the merger would not substantially lessen competition in South Africa — No public interest concerns were raised that would affect the approval of the merger.

COMPETITION TRIBUNAL 
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA
     Case No: 51/LM/Jul02
In the large merger between: 
Standard Bank of South Africa; 
Real Equity Trust  Primary acquiring Firms
and 
Stellenbosch Vineyards Limited Primary Target Firm
Reasons for Decision
______________________________________________________________
APPROVAL
On   28   August   2002   the   Competition   Tribunal   issued   a   Merger   Clearance  
Certificate approving the merger between Standard Bank of South Africa Ltd  
and Stellenbosch Vineyards Limited in terms of section 16(2)(a). The reasons  
for the approval of the merger appear below.
The Parties
1. The   acquiring   firms   are   The   Standard   Bank   of   South   Africa   Limited  
(“Standard   Bank   SA”),   acting   through   its   Standard   Corporate   and  
Merchant   Bank   Division   (“SCMB”)   which   provides   wholesale   banking  
services to corporates, foreign banks and international clients; and Real  
Equity Trust (“RET”), an investment trust holding various stakes in private  
equity investments.
2. The   target   firm   is   Stellenbosch   Vineyards   Limited   (“SVL”),   a   company  
engaged in  the  manufacture,  processing,  packaging and  distributions  of  
wine   products.   SVL’s   shareholders   consist   of   180   individual   farmers,  
cooperatives   or   family   trusts,   each   holding   less   than   4.8%   of   the   total  
issued share capital.
The Merger Transaction
3. Standard Bank SA and RET are acquiring 37.5% and 25% respectively of  
the   shares   in   SVL.   The   current   shareholders   will   retain   the   remaining

37.5%. 
4. SVL   is   concurrently   in   the   process   of   selling   additional   shares   to   the  
current   shareholders   (a   non­renouncable   rights   issue),   pro   rata   to   their  
shareholdings that, if taken up by all existing shareholders, would result in  
the following shareholding structure 1: 
Existing shareholders  49.4% 
Standard Bank SA 30.4%
RET 20.2%
5. However, it was expected that not all existing shareholders would follow  
their rights, thereby altering the shareholding structure. By October 21 st 
the following shareholding structure had emerged:
Existing shareholders  45.9% 
Standard Bank SA 32.5%
RET 21.6%
Rationale for the Transaction
6. The purpose of the rights offer, in conjunction with the private placement,  
is to raise funds, which will be to recapitalise SVL, in order to:
­ reduce the company’s interest­bearing debt; and
­ take advantage of export opportunities. 
The relevant market
7. The acquiring and target firms do not operate in the same relevant market.  
8. Standard Bank, in this transaction acting through its Standard Corporate  
and   Merchant   Bank   division   (SCMB),   provides   retail,   commercial,  
investment   banking   and   insurance   products   and   services   both  
domestically   and   internationally.   Standard   Bank   has   no   similar  
investments in enterprises that are in the same market as the target firm  
(either in wine or the liquor industry in general).
9. RET   is   an   investment   trust   which   enables   trust   investors   to   invest   in  
private   equity   and   equity­related   instruments   in   South   Africa.   RET   is  
owned   by   6   companies   that   are   involved   in   banking,   investment   or  
insurance services, and none of the shareholders owns more than 23.33%  
1  Existing shareholders of SVL, will receive rights to subscribe for rights shares in SVL at 25 centrs  
per rights share, in the ratio of 62 rights shares for every 100 SVL shares held.  Shareholders will be

entitled to apply for rights shares in excess of their entitlement. To the extent that some shareholders do  
not follow or do not fully follow their rights, these shares will be allocated to shareholders that have  
applied for excess shares on an equitable basis.

of   the   shares   in   RET.   RET   takes   only   significant   minority   stakes   in   its  
investments. RET has a diversified investment portfolio and currently has  
no investments in businesses that are in the same market as SVL (either  
in wine or the liquor industry in general).
10. SVL   is   engaged   in   the   manufacture,   processing,   packaging   and  
distribution   of   wine   products.   More   specifically,   the   company   makes  
premium   bottled   wines   for   sale   on   the   South   African   and   various  
international markets. SVL has a current market share of 0.4% of the total  
wine market, or 4.8% of the high price wine segment. 
Effect of transaction on competition
11. Neither Standard Bank nor RET have existing investments in enterprises  
that are in the same market as SVL. As the relevant product markets of  
the parties not overlap, the transaction will have no effect on competition in  
South Africa.
Public Interest
12. The parties submit that there will be no effect on employment in South  
Africa as a direct result of the merger. The unions (SASBO, the finance  
union, and FAWU, the food and allied workers union) have indicated that  
they   do   not   wish   to   participate   as   the   merger   will   have   no   effect   on  
employment (p.533,534). 2  No other public interest issues were raised by  
the parties.
Conclusion
We   conclude   that   the   merger   will   not   lead   to   a   substantial   lessening   of  
competition.  The Tribunal therefore approves the transaction unconditionally.  
There are no public interest concerns which would alter this conclusion.
_____________ 23 October 2002
N. Manoim    Date
Concurring: DH Lewis, M. Moerane
2  FAWU had initially served a notice of intention to participate [Form CC 5(1), filed 11 July 2002], but  
later (5 August 2002) retracted this intention as there will be no job losses resulting from the merger.

For the merging parties:   Cliffe Decker Attorneys 
For the Commission:  M. Mokwana, Competition Commission