Chemical Services Limited and Chemiphos S.A (Pty) Ltd (100/LM/Dec04) [2005] ZACT 25; [2005] 2 CPLR 436 (CT) (26 April 2005)

70 Reportability
Competition Law

Brief Summary

Competition Law — Merger Approval — Conditional approval of merger between Chemical Services Limited and Chemiphos S.A. (Pty) Ltd — Competition Tribunal issued Merger Clearance Certificate with conditions — Merger involves acquisition of 100% shareholding in Chemiphos by Chemserve — Both firms operate in the chemical manufacturing and distribution markets in South Africa — No substantial prevention or lessening of competition found due to negligible market shares post-merger — Conditional approval granted based on findings of the Commission.

1.1 COMPETITION TRIBUNAL
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA
     Case No: 100/LM/Dec04
In the large merger between: 
Chemical Services Limited         Acquiring Firm
1.1.1.1 and
Chemiphos S.A (Pty) Ltd                              Target Firm
___________________________________________________________________________
1.2 REASONS FOR DECISION
___________________________________________________________________________
1 CONDITIONAL APPROVAL  
1. The   Competition   Tribunal   issued   a   Merger   Clearance   Certificate   on   26   April   2005  
approving with conditions the proposed large merger between Chemical Services Limited  
(“Chemserve”) and Chemiphos S.A (Pty) Ltd (“ Chemiphos”). 
2. The reasons for our conditional approval follow and the condition is appended. 
The Transaction
3. In terms of this transaction, Chemserve acquired 100% of the issued share capital in  
Chemiphos from a number of individuals and a trust. 1 
The Merging Parties
4. The primary acquiring firm is Chemserve, a wholly owned subsidiary of AECI Limited  
(“AECI”), a listed chemicals company.  None of AECI’s shareholders controls (directly or  
indirectly) AECI. AECI owns a number of subsidiaries. 2  Below is a diagram setting out the  
1  Parkway Trust (60%), Ian Frans Marinus Van Schalkwyk (23.53%), Paul
Guiseppe Diana­Oliaro (7.06%) and Dean Keith Murray (9.41%).  See pages 24­25 of the record.   
2  Its   wholly   owned   subsidiaries   are:   African   Explosives   Ltd   (“AEL”);   DetNet   Solutions   (Pty)   Ltd  
(“DetNet”); SANS Fibres (Pty) Ltd (“SANS Fibres”);   Chemserve; Dulux (Pty) Ltd (“Dulux”); Heartland  
Properties (Pty) Ltd (“Heartland”); and AECI Coatings (Pty) Ltd (“AECI Coatings”) (80%).

Chemserve subsidiaries.
       100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
       100% 100% 100% 50% 100%  100%
      100%       100%                100% 100% 100%
• %.
5. The primary target firm is Chemiphos, a private company owned and controlled by four  
shareholders consisting of individuals and a trust, who all manage the business of 
  Chemiphos   and   are   also   responsible   for   chemical   sales,   product   management   and  
supplier contracts. 3  Chemiphos has no subsidiaries.
3  See footnote 1  supra.
Chemical 
Services Ltd
Akulu 
Marchon (Pty)  
Ltd
Atlas Consol­
idated 
Industries 
Chemical 
Initiatives 
(Pty) Ltd
Chemoleo 
(Pty) Ltd
Chemserve 
Perlite (Pty) Ltd
Chemserve 
Polymer 
Sciences 
Chemserve 
Systems (Pty)  
Ltd
Lake International  
Technologies 
(Pty)  Ltd
Chemserve Trio  
(Pty) Ltd
Crest 
Chemicals 
(Pty) Ltd
Industrial 
Oleochemicals 
Products
Pelichem 
(Pty) Ltd
Plaaskem 
(Pty) Ltd
Plastamid 
(Pty) Ltd
SA Paper  
Chemicals (Pty)  
Ltd
Senmin 
(Pty) Ltd
Improchem 
(Pty) Ltd
2

Rationale for the transaction
6. According   to   the   parties,   two   of   the   four   shareholders   owning   80%   of   the   shares   in  
Chemiphos wish to exit the business and cash in their investment. Chemserve considers  
this an opportunity to expand its product applications and offerings, particularly through the  
acquisition of a polyphosphoric and phosphoric acid manufacturing facility. Chemserve
anticipates  that  the acquisition   would enhance  shareholder  value as it is expected that  
there would be a growing demand in the market for polyphosphoric and phosphoric acid. 4
The hearing of the present merger
7. The hearing was held on 25 April 2005. The Tribunal called Mr Jack Chiang (“ Mr Chiang ”) 
of   Soyo   Chemicals   as   a   witness   to   the   hearing.   The   merging   parties   called   three  
representatives of the merging parties.
The parties’ activities
8. AECI’s   main   interests   lie   in   the   chemical   industry   through   its   various   subsidiaries.   It  
provides mining solutions, speciality chemicals, speciality fibres and decorative coatings to  
both the global and regional markets. It also has interests in surplus land, managed by  
Heartland, which they offer for commercial, residential, industrial development and leasing.  
The only relevant subsidiary for the Commission’s investigation is SANS Fibres (Pty) Ltd  
(‘SANS Fibres”).  SANS Fibres produces nylon and polyester yarn, 5 and supplies filament  
yarn to local and export markets. It also produces high­grade polyester polymers for its  
own yarn processes and for diverse packaging applications.
9. Chemserve is involved in the manufacturing, marketing, distribution and sale of chemicals  
to customers in a  number of South African industries.  It conducts its business  through  
approximately   17   subsidiaries   listed   above   and   through   joint   ventures   (“JV’s”).  
Chemserve’s website describes it as the largest specialty chemicals operation in Southern

Chemserve’s website describes it as the largest specialty chemicals operation in Southern  
Africa.6  The   Chemserve   group   supplies,   markets   and   distributes   a   diverse   range   of  
speciality   chemicals, 7  raw   materials   and   related   services   to   a   broad   spectrum   of  
industries. 
10. During   its   investigation,   the   Commission   focussed   on   the   following   Chemserve  
subsidiaries:   (1)   Crest   Chemicals;   (2)   Chemserve   Systems;   (3)   Improchem;   and   (4)  
Plaaschem. This is in addition to SANS Fibres, a wholly owned subsidiary of AECI.   We  
agree with the Commission that these are the subsidiaries relevant for the purposes of a  
competition assessment.  The activities of these subsidiaries briefly are:
4  See page 106, para. 3 of the record.
5  According to the Commission, nylon and polyester yarn are used in various apparel, household and  
industrial products.
6  See Chemserve’s website.
7  The parties defined the speciality chemicals as invisible products or additives used to enhance the  
process efficiencies of almost all manufacturing industries. The Commission contended that very few  
products or processes could function effectively without them.
3

10.1. Crest Chemicals is a 50% owned distributor, which includes First Chemicals. It is a  
distributor and supply chain management partner for global and local chemical raw  
material   manufacturers.   It   also   supplies   industrial   and   fine   chemicals   and   raw  
materials.  
10.2. Chemserve Systems, a 100% subsidiary of Chemserve, is active in the markets  
for industrial cleaning and maintenance as well as in the market for the provision  
of metal surface treatment. 
10.3. Improchem, also a Chemserve wholly owned subsidiary, used to be the former  
Ondeo Nalco South Africa. It focuses on water treatment solutions, and competes  
with   Banchem   in   the   downstream   market.   It   also   competes   with   Chemitor   and  
Henkel. 
10.4. Plaaschem supplies a complete range of complementary products to the farming  
community, foundry, water treatment and other related industries.  
11. Chemiphos   is   primarily   involved   in   the   business   of   manufacturing   phosphoric   and  
polyphosphoric   acid.   It   is   also   active   in   the   importing,   marketing   and   distribution   of  
speciality chemicals within South Africa on behalf of local and international manufacturers.  
A   detailed   analysis   of   each   of   the   relevant   activities   of   Chemserve   and   Chemiphos   is  
provided below.
Relevant market
12. As can be seen from above, Chemserve and Chemiphos are both active in the market for  
the   manufacturing   and   distribution   of   chemical   products   in   South   Africa.   In   addition,  
Chemiphos currently supplies a number of Chemserve subsidiaries with various chemical  
products.  Chemiphos  further  supplies   SANS   Fibres,   a  subsidiary  of   AECI   Limited,   with  
some of its chemical requirements.  Therefore, the proposed merger entails both a vertical  
and horizontal dimension.  
13. We now turn to consider the horizontal product overlap in the markets for the manufacture  
and distribution of chemical products.

and distribution of chemical products. 
The chemical manufacturing market  
14. As   mentioned   earlier,   the   horizontal   effects   arise   from   product   overlaps   between   the  
merged entity as  they  are  both  active in  the  manufacturing  and  distribution  markets  of  
chemical products. From a broad market perspective, a product overlap exists. 
15. On   the   upstream   manufacturing   side,   both   Chemserve   and   Chemiphos   manufacture  
chemicals. However, the only chemicals manufactured by Chemiphos are phosphoric and  
polyphosphoric acid. No subsidiary of Chemserve or AECI manufactures phosphoric and  
polyphosphoric acid.  According to the Commission, there would be no product overlap on  
a narrow market definition based on the application of each chemical. There would be a  
product overlap if a broader market definition is used, but the market shares of the merged  
entity   would   be   negligible   irrespective   of   whether   a   national   or   international   market   is  
adopted. The Commission’s investigation revealed that the merged entity’s post­merger  
market shares would not be in excess of 2% in the broad national market for chemical  
4

manufacturing. Given the low market share of the merged entity we are persuaded that the  
transaction would not lead to a substantial prevention or lessening of competition in the  
upstream market.
Chemical distribution market
16. We found that an overlap exists in the downstream distribution side of the market as both  
Chemserve and Chemiphos are active in the distribution of chemical products on behalf of  
national   and   international   chemical   manufacturers.   The   Commission   found   that   most  
manufacturers distribute or supply their own products. The Commission also found that  
third party distributors account for only 15% of the chemicals distributed in South Africa. 8
17. The Commission proffered three possible chemical distribution market definitions. Firstly,  
on   the   broadest   possible   definition,   the   market   may   be   the   one   for   the   provision   of  
distribution services within South Africa. Secondly, the market can be narrowed to include  
the   market   for   distribution   of   chemicals   only   within   South   Africa.   Thirdly,   a   further  
narrowing of the market could result in a market for the distribution of speciality chemicals  
or commodity chemicals or for each specific chemical. 
18. Both the Commission and the merging parties contended that  there is probably a high  
level of substitutability in the market for the distribution of chemical products and that the  
delineation should not necessarily be based on the application of that chemical, but rather  
on the characteristics of that chemical.  
19. The Commission argued that   “if the chemical is suitable to be transported or distributed  
with any other chemical, it should therefore form part of that distribution market” . Hence  
the   delineation   should   be   on   the   characteristics   of   that   product   that   impacts   on   its  
distribution   rather   than   on   its   application. 9  According   to   the   parties,   chemical

manufacturers do not require unique distribution services to distribute chemical products.  
Further to this, the parties were of the view that the relevant downstream market could  
under   certain   conditions   be   defined   as   broadly   as   the   market   for   the   provision   of  
distribution services within South Africa. 10   The Commission’s market enquiry revealed  
that the distribution requirements of chemicals differ from one chemical to another, 11 and  
that   for   the   distribution   of   speciality   chemicals   the   distribution   mechanism   remains   the  
same.   As   a   result,   the   Commission   contended   that   the   distribution   of   each   and   every  
chemical constitutes a separate market on its own. The parties submitted that this is not  
an appropriate delineation of the market, but provided the Commission with market share  
8  See the transcript of 25 April 2005, page 5.
9  Ibid, page 6.
10  See the record, pages 109­110.
11  According to the Commission, distribution can take one or more of the following forms: (1) those  
chemicals   that   are   imported   and   sent   directly   to   customers   on   an   indent   basis;   (2)   those   that   are  
purchased in bulk and transported to customers in bulk tankers; (3) those that are packaged in various  
warehouses where they are stored and distributed to consumers on demand; and (4) certain chemicals  
are purchased in bulk form, transported to a particular company’s sites and packed into a range of  
smaller packages to cater for customers’ needs. 
5

figures with respect to the distribution of specific chemical product categories. 
Evaluating the merger
Market shares for distribution of chemical products
20. The parties’ overlapping product categories are found in the supply of industrial chemicals,
food and nutriceutical chemicals, plastics, performance chemicals and pigments. Below is a  
table which reflects the market shares of the parties together with those of their competitors.
Industrial chemicals 
Product Company Market share  
(Percent)
Dyhard 100 S (Degussa)/   Chemiphos 5
First Chemicals 16
BASF South Africa 25
Air products 40
Other 14
Total 100
Hydroquinone (Clariant)/ 1.4   Chemiphos 10
First Chemicals 1
CJ Petrow 30
Protea Chemicals 40
Other 29
Total 100
Food and neutriceutical
Potassium Sorbate Chemiphos 7
Crest Chemicals 11
CJ Petrow 50
Protea Chemicals 25
Savannah Fine Chemicals 7
Total 100
Plastics
Terluran GP (BASF) Chemiphos 3
Plastamid 4
Protea Chemicals 17
6

Affirm Marketing 44
Bayer 2
Rawmac 17
Plastomark/Dow 10
CHC Polymers 2
Other 1
Total 100
Ultraform (BASF) Chemiphos <1
Plastamid 1
Affirm Marketing 10
Plastomark 9
Rawmac 25
Protea Polymers 8
Advanced Polymers 25
Other 21
Total 100
Ultramid (BASF) Chemiphos 2
Plastamid 3
Chemimpo 3
Rawmac 15
CHC Polymers 5
Cast and Walker 15
Protea Polymers 20
Affirm Marketing 2
Bayer 8
BASF 5
Other 2
Total 100
E­llan (BASF) Chemiphos <1
Industrial Urethanes <1
Huntsman Polyurethanes 40
Protea Chemicals 20
Bayer 30
CHC Polymerworld 5
Other  >3
Total 100
Performance chemicals
Protectol9 (BASF) Chemiphos 5
Akulu Marchon 20
CJ Petrow 30
Chinese Manufacturers 45
Total 100
Trilon (BASF) Chemiphos 2
Crest Chemicals 14
Chemimpo 15
Protea Chemicals 10
CJ Petrow 10
Dow 15
7

Kirsch Pharma SA 10
Chinese Manufacturers 5
Others 19
Total 100
Pigments
Heliogen Blue Blue 7080 (BASF) Chemiphos 3
First Chemicals 1
Clariant 16
CIBA Specialities 30
BASF 30
Indian and Chinese imports 20
Total 100
Heliogen Blue D 7086 (BASF) Chemiphos 20
First Chemicals 5
Clariant 5
CIBA 40
BASF 30
Total 100
Heliogen Blue K6902 (BASF) Chemiphos 3
First Chemicals 10
CIBA 30
JLM – Avecia 12
BASF 40
Clariant 5
Total 100
Heliogen Green L 8605 (BASF) Chemiphos 3
First Chemicals 5
BASF 25
JLM Industries 6
CIBA 60
Rolfes Colour Pigments 1
Total 100
Titanium Oxide
Tronox CR 828 (BASF) Chemiphos 3
First Chemicals 5
Lake International <1
Servochem (Huntsman Tioxide) 70 – 75
Chempro 10
Rolfes Colour Pigments 2
Solvadis SA (Pty) Ltd (Sachtleben  
Chemie)
<1
Other <1
Tronox CR 834 (BASF) Chemiphos 15
First Chemicals 5
Servochem (Huntsman Tioxide) 70 ­ 75
8

Chempro 5
21. Within the five product categories there exist 15 products, viz., Dyhard 100 S (Degussa);  
and Hydroquinne (Clariant) (within the  Industrial chemicals ); potassium sorbate (nutrinova)  
under   food  and  nutriceutical ;  Terluran   GP (BASF),   Ultraform  (BASF),   Ultramid  (BASF),  
and   E­llan   (BASF)   all   under   plastics;   Protecol   (BASF)   and   Trilon   (BASF)   in   the  
performance chemicals ; Heliogen Blue Blue 7080 (BASF), Heliogen Blue D 7088 (BASF),  
Heliogen Blue K6902 (BASF), and Heliogen Green L8605 (BASF) all under  pigments; and  
Tronox CR 828 (BASF), and Tronox CR 834 (BASF) in  titanium dioxide . 
22. The market share figures provided by the parties on the distribution of each and every  
separate chemical revealed that the merging parties would have a combined market share  
varying between 1% and 25%. Out of the 15 product markets, the merging parties will  
have a post­merger market share of 15% or more in six of the product markets. 12  In four  
of   the   six   product   categories,   the   merging   parties   will   still   be   competing   with   large  
competitors such as BASF South Africa, Air Products, CJ Petrow, Protea Chemicals, CIBA  
and Servochem. Again, in four of these instances the merged entity would be the third  
largest   competitor competing  with  well­established   distributors.   In  the  trilon   market,   the  
merged entity would have a post­merger market share of about 16%. However, it appears  
that the merged entity would still  face fierce competition from other market participants  
which   have   either   a   similar   or   slightly   lower   market   share.     In   the   tronox   market,   the  
merging parties would have a 20% market share, competing with Savochem which enjoys  
a 70% to 75% market share.  In light of the aforegoing, we agree that competition even in  
the   narrower   distribution   market   for   specific   chemicals   is   not   substantially   lessened   or  
prevented by the merger.

prevented by the merger. 
23. We will now examine certain vertical issues arising from the merger.
Vertical analysis
Upstream market of manufacture and supply of polyphosphoric acid and phosphoric acid and  
other chemicals. 
24. As noted above, the proposed merger raises vertical concerns at two levels. Firstly, by  
virtue   of   Chemiphos   being   a   manufacturer/distributor   of   polyphosphoric   acid   and  
phosphoric acid which supplies these products to AECI as well as to the subsidiaries of  
Chemserve.   Secondly,   Chemiphos   as   an   importer   (agent)/distributor   of   various   other  
chemical   products   supplied   to   AECI   and   Chemserve   subsidiaries.   There   is   cause   for  
concern in certain of the affected markets and it is these which the attached conditions are  
intended to ameliorate.
25. We accept for purposes of the vertical assessment that the upstream market is the market  
for the manufacturing of polyphosphoric acid and phosphoric acid. As already noted, the  
12  This is with respect to the following product category: dyhard 100 S (degussa); protectol (BASF);  
trilon (BASF); heliogen blue D 7086 (BASF); and tronox CR 834 (BASF).  See the Commission’s report  
(pages 23­26) and the record (pages 114­117).    
9

Commission   focussed   on   those   Chemserve   subsidiaries   who   utilise   phosphoric   and  
polyphosphoric acid as well as other chemical products supplied by Chemiphos and who  
are, therefore, vertically related to the monopoly supplier, Chemiphos. These are: Crest  
Chemicals; Chemserve Systems; Improchem and Plaaschem with SANS Fibres the only  
AECI subsidiary relevant for analysis. The nature of their businesses has already been  
described above. 
26. In   its   investigation,   the   Commission   identified   ten   (10)   chemical   products   which  
Chemiphos   supplies   to   the   various   subsidiaries   of   AECI   and   Chemserve.   The   most  
significant   are   clearly   polyphosphoric   and   phosphoric   acid   which   are   produced   by  
Chemiphos. The remaining eight products that are supplied by Chemiphos to, inter alia,  
subsidiaries of Chemserve and AECI are Melmet F10, 13  methylene chloride, 14  sodium  
nitrite,15 acesulfame K, 16 taurine, 17 luran, 18 styrolux, 19 and golpanol boz. 20
27. Phosphoric acid is a thick, colourless and odourless liquid or a thick, colourless crystalline  
solid. Phosphoric acid is incompatible with strong caustics and most metals. It is primarily  
used for the manufacture of phosphate salts, which are in turn used for detergents and  
fertilisers.  We were told that there are two methods of production that can be used in its  
manufacture, i.e., the thermal and the wet processes.  The former is used to produce acid  
from elementary phosphorus.  The acid produced is extremely pure and of a high quality  
and it is used in food as well as other sophisticated manufacturing processes. It appears  
that   the   latter   process   is   used   to   manufacture   the   majority   of   phosphoric   acid.  
13  Melmet F10 is a high range water reducer used in construction and industrial products based on  
Portland and other types of hydraulic cement. It is used as an additive in all types of grouts, mortars,

coatings   and   is   a   component   of   concrete   admixtures   and   emulsions.   Melmet   F10   is   a   spray   dried  
powder with free flowing characteristics ideal for dry blending and water dissolution.   
14  The   parties   describe   methylene   chloride   (alternatively   termed   dichloromethane)   as   a   colourless  
liquid with a mild, sweet odour. It is used as an industrial solvent and a paint stripper. It may also be  
found in some aerosol and pesticide products and is used in the manufacture of photographic film.
15  This product is used in the manufacture of nitra­compounds and azo and fabric dyes and bleaching  
agents. It is also used in the pore­treatment of cement and metals and as an antifreeze, as well as in  
the pharmaceutical industry.
16  According to the parties, acesulfame K is a calorie­free sweetener used in beverages, food, oral  
hygiene   and   pharmaceutical   products.   Food   containing   this   product   includes   for   example   tabletop  
sweeteners, desserts, gum, breath­mints, puddings, baked food, soft drinks, candies and canned foods.  
17  Taurine is a product incorporated into numerous food and diet supplements and is used mainly to  
control anxiety, hyperactivity, poor brain function, hypoglycaemia, hypertension and seizures. It is an  
amino acid found throughout the body chiefly in nerve tissue and muscle.  
18  This is a trade name for styrene / acrylonitrile copolymers that are active in the area of household  
goods   and   tableware,   cosmetic   packaging,   sanitary   and   toiletry   applications   as   well   as   for   writing  
materials and office supplies.
19  Styrolux is the trade name for the BASF range of thermoplastic styrene butadiene copolymers. It is  
used in the areas of food packaging such as thermoformed cups and lids and also in applications such  
as shrink film and transparent coat hangers. 
20  We were told that golpanol boz is utilised as a component for brightening nickel and nickel­iron alloy

electroplating   baths   and   as   a   brightener   for   copper   plating.   It   is   used   as   a   raw   material   for   the  
electroplating industry. In nickel electrolytes, it improves deformity and throwing power. It also has the  
ability to improve the tolerance for metal impurities in electroplating paths. According to the parties, the  
types of products that can be electroplated include automotive parts, shop fittings, bathroom fittings and  
building products (mainly fasteners). 
10

Polyphosphoric acid (“PPA”) is a mixture of polymeric acids that have been polymerised at  
different extents. It is a colourless viscous liquid with high affinity for water and slightly  
corrosive.     It   turns   into   phosphoric   acid   when   dissolved   into   water.   PPA   is   formed   by  
condensing orthophosphoric acid to eliminate water between two or more molecules.  It is  
formed when two molecules  of phosphoric acid are heated to remove one molecule of  
water.  The manufacturing process follows the well­known thermal route, whereby molten  
yellow  phosphorus  is atomised  and burnt with compressed air in a vertical  combustion  
tower.  PPA is used in making organic catalysts, synthetic resins, acidic water dehydration  
agents, high grade feed supplements, fire retardants and anti static electricity agents. 21 
28. According   to   the   Commission,   polyphosphoric   acid   is   basically   a   concentrated   form   of  
phosphoric acid whilst phosphoric acid has a concentration of between 65% and 85%. The  
Commission further pointed out that there are two types of phosphoric acid, i.e., white and  
green   phosphoric   acid.     It   appears   that   there   are   differences   between   the   production  
process   of   these   two   kinds   of   phosphoric   acid   as   well   as   in   their   applications.     White  
phosphoric   acid   is   formed   during   the   thermal   process   and   is   used   for   sophisticated  
technical   manufacturing   and   it   is   suitable   as   an   input   product   in   the   manufacturing   of  
human consumption products such as in food, soft drinks, etc. Green phosphoric acid is  
formed  through  the  wet  acid  method  and  is used  in the manufacturing  of  fertiliser   and  
animal feed.  In brief, white phosphoric acid is utilised for human consumption whereas the  
green one is suitable for the agricultural industry.  The Commission contended that whilst

green one is suitable for the agricultural industry.  The Commission contended that whilst  
white phosphoric acid can be substituted for green phosphoric acid, the reverse does not  
apply.  White phosphoric acid is purer and more expensive than the green one.  In light of  
this, the Commission contended that each should constitute a separate product market. 
Market shares
29. The Commission’s investigation revealed that the parties would have a negligible market  
share of about 1% in the manufacturing of green phosphoric acid. 22  However, the market  
for  the  manufacturing  of  white  phosphoric  acid  and polyphosphoric  acid  is a  cause for  
concern as Chemiphos’ pre­merger market share is estimated at 85%.  Post­merger, this  
will remain the same because Chemserve would simply replace Chemiphos in this market.  
Customer foreclosure and / or input foreclosure
30. Our concern is with the possibility of customer or input foreclosure.  The former refers to  a 
situation where a vertically integrated firm denies or limits access by upstream rivals to  
downstream   customers.   The   latter   –   input   foreclosure   –   arises   where   a   vertically  
integrated firm denies or raises the cost of inputs to its downstream rivals. 
31. The   merging   parties   contended   that   the   high   national   market   shares   should   not  
necessarily give rise to prohibition of the merger.  They pointed out that vertical integration  
may   give   rise   to   pro­competitive   benefits.     In   support   of   their  contention,   they   argued,  
21  For a detailed nature of these two products, refer to the record, pages 131­133.
22  See the transcript, page 10.
11

firstly, that it would not be rational for the merged entity to refuse supplying Chemiphos’  
products to customers  because  Chemserve  /  AECI  subsidiaries  only  account  for  about  
10.6%   of   Chemiphos’   total   phosphoric   and   polyphosphoric   acid   sales.     Secondly,   they  
argued that most of the chemicals supplied by Chemiphos, other, than phosphoric and  
polyphosphoric acid, could be sourced from a number of alternative suppliers.  Lastly, they  
argued   that   the  merged  entity  would   not   be  able   to  exercise   market   power   because   it  
supplies  its products to powerful customers that possess very significant  countervailing  
powers.23 
Downstream markets that use phosphoric and polyphosphoric acid as input
32. During the course of its investigations, the Commission was alerted to the prospect of anti­
competitive   consequences   in   markets   downstream   of   the   merged   entity.     As   already  
elaborated these concerns were based on the merging parties presence in a number of  
markets   that   utilised   phosphoric   and   polyphosphoric   acid   as   inputs   in   their   production  
processes.  After a thorough investigation the Commission narrowed its concerns to three  
markets.     That   is,   in   the   markets   for   the   provision   of   water   treatment   solutions,   the  
manufacturing   of   industrial   chemicals   and   the   market   for   metal   surface   treatment  
solutions. 
33. There   are   clearly   no   effective   or   suitable   substitutes   for   white   phosphoric   acid   or  
polyphosphoric acid and several downstream users of these essential products feared that  
in the event of shortages or disruptions in supply, AECI / Chemserve subsidiaries might  
get   preferential   treatment.   The   effect   of   this   could   be   to   compromise   the   competitors’  
ability to provide a reliable service to customers.  
34. As explained above, the national market share of Chemiphos in the production of white

34. As explained above, the national market share of Chemiphos in the production of white  
phosphoric acid and polyphosphoric acid is approximately 85%.  On the one hand, certain  
market   participants   and   customers   of   the   merging   parties   raised   concerns   that   both  
phosphoric and polyphosphoric acid are not easily available through importation due to a  
number of constraints. The merging parties contended, on the other hand, that imports are  
available   in   consistent   and   reliable   supply   and   that   they   are   directly   substitutable   with  
products   produced   locally.     However   this   was   not   confirmed   by   the   Commission’s  
investigation.   Factors such as currency fluctuations make forward budget planning very  
difficult.   It appears that an importer of these products has to pay customs, clearing and  
freight   charges.     Furthermore,   some   importers   seem   to   lack   the   capacity   to   dilute   the  
respective products to their required concentration.    We were told that it was not cost­
effective   to   import   as   the   exchange   rate   and   custom   duties   make   the   product   more  
expensive   and   that   overseas   pricing   structures   are   higher   than   sourcing   locally.  
Furthermore, it seems that importers are required to import in huge volumes so as to meet  
local   cheaper   prices.   We   were   also   told   that   imports   are   impractical   because   of   the  
hazardous   nature   of   the   polyphosphoric   acid   resulting   in   importers   being   required   to  
increase   their   insurance   coverage   of   the   relevant   product.   Importers   also   seem   to  
experience logistical problems with delays occurring between the placing of orders and  
receiving   them.   The   other   market   participants   estimate   that   importers   have   to   wait   for  
23  See the record, pages 129­130.
12

approximately   6   weeks   to   get   the   imported   product.   However,   a   local   product   takes  
between 3 to 5 days. 24  
35. Amongst other concerns raised in the downstream manufacturing market was the fact that  
the customers of the players in the metal surface treatment industry are major customers,  
i.e. the motor vehicle manufacturers, who are required to comply with the local content  
requirements of the motor industry development plan and are therefore penalised for using  
imported materials. We were told that the motor manufacturers prefer to use local content  
as much as possible because they, in turn, get rebates and tax relief. The Commission  
contended that this leaves the Chemserve Systems’ competitors at a disadvantage if they  
are not able to import at such higher prices or if they do not secure a reliable supply. In  
addition to the above, there were rumours at the time of the hearing of the present matter  
that   Chemserve   intend   to   acquire   Orlik   &   Associates,   which   is   another   player   in   the  
downstream   production   market.   The   Commission   contended   that   there   were   no   valid  
reasons to disregard these concerns as being ill­founded, particularly having regard to the  
merged entity’s high market shares of approximately 85%, the non­substitutability of white  
phosphoric   and   polyphosphoric   acid   and   the   high   barriers   to   entry   in   this   market   as  
outlined below.
36. However, the merging parties argued that there is already a   fairly high level of imports  
coming into the country – imports accounted for approximately 30% of sales in the year  
2004.   Indeed Chemiphos itself had, on occasion, imported acid into SA and there were  
other firms  that continued to do so. China  is the major source of imports and Israel is  
offering  a  reliable  product at  competitive prices.  They pointed  out that no import tariffs  
exist for phosphoric acid. According to the parties, insurance is certainly not a problem as

exist for phosphoric acid. According to the parties, insurance is certainly not a problem as  
the   general   insurance   policy   adequately   covers   the   importation   of   phosphoric   acid.   In  
addition, the merging parties do not regard logistical issues as a fundamental barrier to  
importing the product into South Africa. 25   However, while the evidence suggests that the  
importation of phosphoric acid is possible, this is only viable for the smaller users of the  
product. 
37. The   merging   parties   sought   to  allay   fears  of   foreclosure   by  pointing   out   that   there  are  
certain  companies  within the Chemserve stable who support Soyo Chemicals,   the  only  
other South African producer of phosphoric and polyphosphoric acid.  Mr Trevor Street, a  
representative of the merging parties, testified that there would not be any changes post­
merger as each of Chemserve companies would make their own purchasing decisions.  
He reiterated that they would certainly encourage any company within Chemserve to buy  
from   the   best   possible   source. 26    We   were   further   told   that   that   Chemiphos   has   no  
exclusive distribution agreements with respect to the products in question. 27   
Barriers to entry
24  See the transcript, page 14.
25  See the testimony of Mr Ian van Schalkwyk (Managing Director of Chemserve), page 38 of the  
transcript.
26  See his testimony, page 52 of the transcript.
27  See the transcript, page 21.
13

38.   The   Commission’s   view   is   that   entry   into   the   market   for   the   manufacture   of   white  
phosphoric and polyphosphoric acid is unlikely.   The Commission’s investigation revealed  
that R20 million would be required in order to start a plant that produces 600 metric tons  
per month production capacity for phosphoric and polyphosphoric acid. According to the  
Commission, the latter plant would take a year to bring on stream. The merging parties  
estimated   that   it   would   require   approximately   R150   million   to   set   up   an   effective  
manufacturing plant of white phosphoric acid and polyphosphoric acid – from which we  
can only infer that the plant concerned would produce approximately 4500 metric tons of  
phosphoric and polyphosphoric acid per month. This in itself suggests that barriers to entry  
in this market are high.   Save for Soyo Chemicals, a 1996 entrant that enjoys a market  
share of between 5% to 10%, there have not been any new entrant into this market.
39. The merging parties conceded that the main barrier to entry in this market is the capital  
required to establish a plant capable of processing the relevant materials for production.  
However,   the   capital   required   would   vary   depending   on   the   size   of   the   operation  
concerned. The parties also contended that it would be relatively inexpensive for the three  
firms   currently   involved   in   the   manufacturing   of   green   phosphoric   acid   to   convert   their  
existing facilities for the production of white phosphoric acid.  The Commission followed up  
with  these entities  to  obtain  their views.    One of  the  producers did  not  respond  to the  
Commission’s enquiries.  One of the remaining two entities indicated that it had previously  
tried to penetrate the market, but costs and barriers to entry prevented it doing so whilst  
the other reiterated that it is not contemplating entering the market at all.     
Public Interest Issues

Public Interest Issues
40. According   to   the   parties,   the   transaction   would   not   result   in   a   negative   effect   on  
employment and no retrenchments were envisaged.  
The proposed conditions
41. It is evident from above that there is a likelihood of a substantial lessening of competition  
because   of   the   vertical   links   in   certain   of   the   markets   implicated   in   this   transaction.  
Accordingly, the Commission recommended the imposition of several conditions.   These  
conditions   were   primarily   aimed   at,   inter   alia ,   ensuring   continued   supply   to   all   of  
Chemiphos’ current customers at the current prices for a period of 3 years. 
42. At   the   hearing   we   asked   the   Commission   whether   it   had   considered   compelling   the  
merging parties to divest from some of the downstream markets as part of its conditions.  
We accepted the Commission’s view that the conditions would suffice to ensure that the  
threat   to   competition   would   be   eliminated.     In   their   submission   against   divestiture,   the  
merging parties contended, firstly, that there is ample evidence that imports are feasible  
viable alternative into the market and that imports can readily come into this market.  Mr  
Chiang’s evidence also suggested that imports are able to satisfy the requirements of the  
smaller purchasers of phosphoric acid.   Secondly, the merging parties have negotiated  
fairly   extensive   undertakings   with   the   major   customers,   who,   on   the   basis   of   those  
undertakings, have indicated that they do not have an objection to the transaction. Thirdly,  
the  merging   parties   argued   that   certain  of   Chemserve  companies  that  purchase  inputs  
14

from Chemiphos are not direct competitors with other independent Chemiphos customers. 
43. In brief, the attached conditions are designed to ensure that the merged entity continues to  
supply all Chemiphos’ customers sourcing white phosphoric and polyphoshoric acid on a  
non­discriminatory basis and on the same terms and conditions, which existed prior to the  
merger. This would ensure that those downstream users of Chemiphos products would not  
be advantaged relative to their competitors.   
44. It is the Tribunal’s view that the attached conditions would alleviate potential competitive  
concerns that may arise pursuant to the merger.  Our order is reproduced below.
_____________                                                                                                     7 July 2005
David Lewis                                                                                                                Date 
Concurring:  Yasmin Carrim and Thandi Orleyn 
For the merging parties:   Anthony Norton ( Webber Wentzel Bowens ). 
For the Commission:  Rudolph   Labuschagne   ( Legal   Services )   assisted   by   Hardin  
Ratshisusu and Asogren Chetty ( Mergers & Acquisitions )
1.3
15

1.4
1.5 COMPETITION TRIBUNAL
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA
     Case No: 100/LM/Dec04
In the large merger between: 
Chemical Services Limited         Acquiring Firm
1.5.1.1 and
Chemiphos S.A (Pty) Ltd                              Target Firm
___________________________________________________________________________
1.6 ORDER
___________________________________________________________________________
2
3 A. The merger is approved in terms of section 16(2)(b) of the Act subject to the condition  
that:
4 1. The merged entity shall continue to supply all Chemiphos’ customers sourcing white  
phosphoric and polyphosphoric acid at the price and volumes at which Chemiphos was  
supplying its customers sourcing white phosphoric and polyphosphoric acid at the date of  
the merger notification, being 26 November 2004,  subject  to the provisions below and  
compliance   by   customers   with   their   contractual   and   commercial   obligations   to  
Chemiphos. 
5 2. In the event of production stoppages, such that Chemiphos is unable to meet the full  
contractual requirements  of all its  customers and its internal  requirements, Chemiphos  
shall,   to   the   extent   that   it   reduces   the   supply   of   Polyphosphoric   acid,   re­schedule   its  
supply of Polyphosphoric Acid on a non­discriminatory, pro­rata basis and to the extent  
that it reduces the supply of Phosphoric Acid, Chemiphos shall re­schedule its supply of  
Phosphoric Acid on a non­discriminatory, pro rata basis.
16

6 3.   The   merged   entity   shall   be   entitled   to   increase   the   prices   charged   to   Chemiphos’  
customers, as at 26 November 2004, in terms of the formula attached hereto marked A  
(in respect of phosphoric Acid) and B (in respect of polyphosphoric Acid). For the sake of  
clarity it is recorded that the merged entity is not obliged to increase its prices to the full  
extent permitted by the formula, but that the formula will constitute the maximum amount  
by which the pricing may be increased.
7 4. The conditions set out herein shall apply for a period of 3 years from the date of the  
Tribunal’s order in relation to this transaction.
8 5. If any independent purchaser of white phosphoric and polyphosphoric acid wishes to  
verify compliance with these conditions, the merged entity shall procure such verification  
from its auditors in the form of an audit certificate at such independent purchaser’s cost,  
within 30 days of such independent purchaser’s request for verification. 
Monitoring of the conditions
9 6. The merged entity shall provide the Commission with an audit certificate issued by the  
merged   entity's   auditors,   on   an   annual   basis,   verifying   compliance   with   the   above­
mentioned conditions.   The merged entity's financial year end is 31 December and the  
Audit   certificate   shall   be   provided   to   the   Commission   within   8   weeks   of   the   merged  
entities financial year end.  An employee of the merged entity will provide the Commission  
with   an   affidavit   at   six   monthly   intervals   from   the   date   of   approval   of   the   merger  
confirming compliance with these conditions.
10 7.   The   reporting   obligations   are   applicable   for   the   duration   of   the   period   of   these  
conditions.  For the sake of clarity it is recorded that the final audit report and affidavit will  
be furnished to the Commission after the period set out in paragraph 4 has elapsed.

be furnished to the Commission after the period set out in paragraph 4 has elapsed.
11 8.   Were   the   Chemserve   Group   to   seek   to   acquire   another   firm   in   the   metal   surface  
treatment   market,   including   Orlik   and   Associates,   the   Commission   would   require  
notification of this transaction irrespective of whether it meets the necessary thresholds.
B.   Chemiphos is required to forward a copy of this Order to all its customers for phosphoric  
and polyphosphoric acid.
17

C.     A Merger Clearance Certificate be issued in terms of Competition Tribunal rule 35(5)(a).  
18

12 PHOSPHORIC ACID PRICE ADJUSTMENT FORMULA
13 9. The merging parties shall be entitled to increase the individual prices of Phosphoric  
Acid charged to each of Chemiphos' customers, as at 26 November 2004, according to  
the following principles: 
13.1 9.1   Price   increases   will   take   into  account   fluctuations   in   the   US$   acquisition   cost   of  
yellow                        phosphorous (CFR Durban), including  fluctuations  in the Rand/US$  
exchange rate as well as fluctuations in the PPI 28 over the previous quarter.
9.2 The prices for 26 November 2004, from which price adjustments will be determined are ex  
Chemiphos' works and are based on:
9.2.1 a CFR Durban Price of US$2 340.00 per metric tonne with payment terms of cash  
against documents;
9.2.2 all associate clearing and forwarding charges 29; and 
9.2.3 an exchange rate of R6.30 to USD1.00
9.3 Any   such   price   increase   will   occur   on   a   quarterly   basis 30  or   when   the   Rand/US$  
exchange   rate 31  has   increased   by   more   than   5%   from   the   exchange   rate   that  
prevailed   at   the   commencement   of   the   relevant   quarter   and   where   the   increase  
persists for a minimum period of one month 32.
9.4           For   the   purpose   of   calculating   quarterly   price   adjustments,   the   percentage   of   the  
product price which is attributable to the US$ acquisition cost of yellow phosphorous shall  
be deemed to be 78%.   Accordingly, changes to the Rand/US$ exchange rate and the  
US$ acquisition cost of yellow phosphorous (CFR Durban) utilised to calculate the price  
28  The PPI is the Production Price Index output of South African Industry Groups for South African  
consumption, chemicals and chemical products, as recorded in the Statistical News Release, table 3.1  
group 2.11 ("other chemical products") published monthly by the Central Statistics Service. 
29  These include, landing and clearing fees as determined by Portnet and Safcor, Marine Insurance,

hazardous goods insurance, transit insurance and public liability insurance
30  In other words January, April, July and October
31  Rand/US$ Bank Selling Price as quoted by Standard Bank
32  One Calendar Month
A
19

for the previous quarter, shall be applied to 78% of the price for the previous quarter.  The  
remaining 22% of the price for the previous quarter shall be adjusted in accordance with  
changes in the PPI. 
9.5 The price adjustment, according to the weighting set out above, will occur in advance of  
any quarter, utilising: 
9.5.1 the average Rand/US$ bank selling rate for the first two months of the current quarter;
9.5.2 the average US$ price at which yellow phosphorous was acquired CFR Durban, for  
the first two months of the current quarter ; and
9.5.3 the 22% referred to in the preceding paragraph will be adjusted by a factor equivalent  
to the published percentage increase in the PPI, calculated on the last month of the  
preceding quarter.  In other words a price increase/decrease to come into effect on 1  
April 2005 will be based on the increase/decrease in the PPI for December 2004 as  
against that for September 2004.
9.6 Transport   and   packaging   charges   for   the   delivery   of   product   to   the   purchaser   will   be  
reflected seperately on the invoice and will be the actual cost incurred by Chemiphos for  
such packaging and transportation.
14 10. By way of an example:
Assuming the Following:
BASE EX­WORKS PRICE  3.770 R/KG
BASE R/$ EXCHANGE RATE 10.0 R/US$
BASE PPI 113.7
BASE YELLOW PHOSPHORUS PRICE CFR DURBAN (AVE  
PRICE FOR PERIOD)
  980 US$/MT
20

Then, if the exchange rate where to change to R6.30/US$; and
the price of Yellow Phosphorous were to change to R2340/Metric Tonne; and
the PPI were to change to 124.3
the following Phosphoric Acid price would result
PHOSPHORIC ACID PRICE FOR THE FOLLOWING QUARTER
1)  YELLOW PHOSPHORUS CONTENT :
AVE. R/$ EXCHANGE RATE FOR RELEVANT TWO  
MONTH PERIOD:
6.30
AVE. YELLOW PHOSPHORUS PRICE RELEVANT TWO  
MONTH PERIOD
  2340 $/MT
BASE PHOS ACID PRICE YELLOW PHOS. CONTENT = 0.78 x  
3.770 = 2.941
NEW PHOS ACID PRICE YELLOW PHOS. CONTENT = 
2.941 x (NEW R/$/10.0) x (NEW YP  
PRICE/980) =
4.424 R/KG
2)  LOCAL CONTENT :
PPI FOR RELEVANT  
MONTH:
124.3
BASE PHOS ACID PRICE LOCAL PPI CONTENT = 0.22 x 3.770 =  
0.829
NEW PHOS ACID PRICE LOCAL PPI CONTENT = 0.829 x  
(NEW CPI/113.7) =
0.907 R/KG
NEW PHOSPHORIC ACID EX­WORKS PRICE  
FOR RELEVANT QUARTER 
5.33 R/KG
21

15 POLYPHOSPHORIC ACID PRICE ADJUSTMENT FORMULA
16 11.   The   merging   parties   shall   be   entitled   to   increase   the   individual   prices   of  
Polyphosphoric   Acid   charged   to   each   of   Chemiphos'   customers,   as   at   26   November  
2004, according to the following principles: 
11.1 Price increases will take into account fluctuations in the US$ acquisition cost of yellow  
phosphorous (CFR Durban), including fluctuations in the Rand/US$ exchange rate as  
well as fluctuations in the PPI 33 over the previous quarter.
11.2 The prices for 26 November 2004, from which price adjustments will be determined  
are ex Chemiphos' works and are based on: 
11.2.1 RAW MATERIAL:
Raw   Material:     Imported   Yellow   Phosphorous   with  
actual cost based on:
• A CFR Durban Price of USD2 340 per metric tonne  
with payment terms of cash against documents;
• all associated clearing and forwarding charges 34;
• an exchange rate of R6.30 to USD1.00; and
• a   phosphorous   efficiency   factor   of   90%   and   a  
conversion   factor   as   determined   by   the  
concentration of the product as shown in paragraph  
15.
TOTAL RAW MATERIAL COST
R6 582.00 / Metric Tonne
11.2.2 UTILITIES, PRODUCTION OVERHEADS AND PROFIT
Utilities, production overheads and profit element.
TOTAL UTILITIES,  
PRODUCTION OVERHEADS  
AND PROFIT 
R6 749.00 / Metric Tonne
TOTAL BASE PRICE R13 331 / Metric Tonne
33   The PPI is the Production Price Index output of South African Industry Groups for South  
African consumption, chemicals and chemical products, as recorded in the Statistical  
News Release, table 3.1 group 2.11 ("other chemical products") published monthly by  
the Central Statistics Service. 
34  These include, landing and clearing fees as determined by Portnet and Safcor, Marine Insurance,  
hazardous goods insurance, transit insurance and public liability insurance
B
22

12. Any   such   price   increase   will   occur   on   a   quarterly   basis 35  or   when   the   Rand/US$  
exchange   rate 36  has   increased   by   more   than   5%   from   the   exchange   rate   that  
prevailed   at   the   commencement   of   the   relevant   quarter   and   where   the   increase  
persists for a minimum period of one month 37.
17 13. The base price will be adjusted in advance of every quarter:
13.1 by an amount equivalent to the change in the cost of any raw materials described in  
paragraph 12.1 over the preceding quarter; and
13.2 the amount reflected in paragraph 12.2 (as adjusted in terms of this paragraph) will be  
adjusted   by   a   factor   equivalent   to   the   published   percentage   increase   in   the   PPI,  
calculated on the last month of the preceding quarter.  In other words a price increase/
decrease to come into effect on 1 April 2005 will be based on the increase/decrease in  
the PPI for December 2004 as against that for September 2004.
18 14. Transport and packaging charges for the delivery of product to the purchaser will be  
reflected seperately on the invoice and will be the actual cost incurred by Chemiphos for  
such packaging and transportation.
19 15.  Example: Production Raw Material Cost Calculation :
15.1 115.5% Polyphosphoric Acid
=  (variable in store yellow phosphorous cost x fixed conversion factor) / 90%
=  (USD 2340 38 x 6.3 39 x 1.1 40 x 0.3654 41) / 90% 42
= R6582 / Metric Ton
15.2 112.7% Polyphosphoric Acid
= (variable in store yellow phosphorous cost x fixed conversion factor) / 90%
35  In other words January, April, July and October
36  Rand/US$ Bank Selling Price as quoted by Standard Bank
37  One Calendar Month
38  Yellow Phosphorous Price:  US$/metric tonne CFR Durban
39  Rand/US$ Exchange Rate
40  10% Landing, clearing and delivery cost
41  Kilograms   of   yellow   phosphorous   in   1   Kilogram   of   Polyphosphoric   Acid   for   a   particular   Grade  
(Theoretical)

(Theoretical)
42  Yield factor of Yellow phosphorous used in the manufacturing process. 
23

= (USD 2340 x 6.3 x 1.1 x 0.3565) / 90%
= R6420 / Metric Ton
___________                   26 April 2005
David Lewis                          Date
 
Concurring:  Yasmin Carrim and Thandi Orleyn 
For the merging parties:   Anthony Norton ( Webber Wentzel Bowens ). 
For the Commission:  Rudolph   Labuschagne   ( Legal   Services )   assisted   by   Hardin  
Ratshisusu and Asogren Chetty ( Mergers & Acquisitions )
24