Gauteng Provincial Government and ApexHi Properties Ltd (79/LM/Oct04) [2004] ZACT 71 (28 October 2004)

55 Reportability
Competition Law

Brief Summary

Competition Law — Merger Approval — Gauteng Provincial Government acquiring properties from ApexHi Properties Ltd — Transaction involves GPG acquiring properties in Johannesburg CBD for employee accommodation — Overlap in portfolios noted, but GPG does not compete in the rental market as it does not rent out properties — Merger will not substantially lessen competition and raises no significant public interest concerns — Unconditional approval granted for the merger.

COMPETITION TRIBUNAL 
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA
Case no: 79/LM/Oct04
In The Large Merger Between: 
 Gauteng Provincial Government 
And
ApexHi Properties Ltd
Reasons for Decision
Approval
1. On   27   October   2004   the   Competition   Tribunal   issued   a   Merger   Clearance   Certificate  
approving the transaction between Gauteng Provincial Government and ApexHi Properties  
Ltd. The reasons for this decision follow. 
The Parties 
2. The primary acquiring firm is Gauteng Provincial Government (in its Department of Public  
Transport, Roads and Works) (“GPG”).
3. The primary target firm is ApexHi Properties Limited.
The transaction
4. The   transaction   involves   GPG   acquiring   from   ApexHi   various   properties   in   the  
Johannesburg Central Business District (“Johannesburg CBD”), to be occupied by its own  
employees.
The Parties’ Activities
5. GPG   currently   owns   seven   properties   in   the   rentable   office   space   sector   in   the  
Johannesburg CBD.
6. ApexHi is a variable loan stock company. ApexHi’s property portfolio includes properties in  
the following sectors:
6.1. Rentable office space,
6.2. Rentable industrial space,
6.3. Rentable retail space,

6.4. Other rentable space.
Impact on competition
7. There is an overlap in the portfolios of ApexHi and GPG in that both own rentable office  
space   in   the   Johannesburg   CBD.   However,   unlike   ApexHi,   GPG   does   not   rent   out   to  
independent tenants any of the rentable office properties that it owns in the Johannesburg  
CBD. All these properties are utilized by GPG to accommodate its own employees and GPG  
therefore does not earn any profit from the buildings that it holds in the relevant market.  
There are a number of players in the market for rentable office space and GPG cannot be  
seen as a competitor in this market.
Conclusion
8. Having   regard   to   the   above,   we   conclude   that   the   merger   will   not   lead   to   a   substantial  
lessening of competition and there are no significant public interest concerns.   Accordingly,  
we  agree with  the  Commission’s   recommendation  that   the  transaction  be unconditionally  
approved.
28 October 2004
D Lewis   Date
Concurring: N Manoim and M Mokuena
For the merging parties: V Chetty (Edward Nathan & Friedland) (Pty) Ltd
    L Mazwai (Ledwaba Mazwai Attorneys)
For the Commission: G Thapedi, M Mohlala and H Ratsisusu
2