Lanum Securities SA and 3C Telecommunications (Pty) Ltd (34/LM/May05) [2005] ZACT 36 (1 June 2005)

55 Reportability
Competition Law

Brief Summary

Competition — Merger approval — Merger between Lanum Securities SA and 3C Telecommunications (Pty) Ltd — Lanum to acquire 15% of shares in 3C — No substantial lessening of competition — Tribunal approves merger unconditionally. The Competition Tribunal approved the merger between Lanum Securities SA and 3C Telecommunications (Pty) Ltd, where Lanum, a new company with no prior trading history, will acquire a minority stake in 3C, which operates in the South African telecommunications market through its subsidiary, Cell C. The Tribunal found that the merger would not result in a substantial lessening or prevention of competition and identified no public interest concerns that would affect the approval.

COMPETITION TRIBUNAL 
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA
     Case No: 34/LM/May05
In the large merger between: 
Lanum Securities SA 
and
3C Telecommunications (Pty) Ltd 
Reasons for Decision
________________________________________________________________
APPROVAL
On 25 May 2005 the Competition Tribunal issued a Merger Clearance Certificate  
approving the merger between the 3C Telecommunications (Pty) Ltd and Lanum  
Securities SA in terms of section 16(2)(a). The reasons for the approval of the  
merger appear below.
The Parties
1. The   acquiring   firm   is   Lanum   Securities   S.A.   (“Lanum”).   This   is   a   new  
company   that   has   henceforth   not   traded.   It   is   controlled   by   Rashid  
Engineering   which is in turn owned by a Saudi Arabian national. Lanum  
has no subsidiaries in South Africa.
2. The primary target firm is 3C Telecommuncations (Pty) Ltd (“3C”), jointly  
controlled by CellSaf (Pty) Ltd (as to 40%) and Oger Telecom (South Africa)  
(Pty) Ltd (as to 60%). Oger Telecom is in turn controlled by Saudi Oger Ltd,  
a company registered in Saudi Arabia. CellSAf comprises a consortium of  
historically   disadvantaged   shareholders.   3C   owns   and   controls   one  
company only,  Cell C (Pty) Ltd (“Cell C”), the third mobile network operator  
in South Africa. 
3. Other subsidiaries of Cell C include Cell C Service Provider Company (Pty)  
Ltd  which  provides  sales,  distribution  and  retail   marketing  exclusively  for

Cell C. Secondly, Cell C Property Holdings Company (Pty) Ltd  which holds  
properties on behalf of Cell C.
The Merger Transaction
4. Lanum will acquire 15% of the shares in 3C from Cellsaf. It will therefore  
post­merger be in joint control of 3C, together with Oger Telecom (60%)  
and CellSAf (25%).  
5. Therefore essentially Lanum will become a new joint controlling shareholder  
while CellSAf will dilute its shareholding in 3C.
Rationale for the Transaction 
f. The   parties   aver   that   this   transaction   entails   significant   foreign  
investment in the local telecommunications industry. 
7. Security for the funding has ultimately been provided by Saudi Oger by way  
of guarantees, and CellSAf incurred certain security obligations in relation  
to   the   funding   and   its   other   borrowings.     The   rationale   for   this   merger  
transaction is to settle all of CellSAf’s loan funding and release it from the  
security obligations it incurred in relation to its borrowings .
8. This   will   allow   CellSAf’s   shareholding   in   3C,   which   is   presently   entirely  
encumbered in favour of the funders of its shareholding, to be held debt­
free.
The relevant product market
9. Rashid   Engineering   provides   architectural   and   engineering  
consulting services in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Neither it nor its  
shareholders   has   any   interests   in   telecommuncations   anywhere  
worldwide.
10. 3C is involved in the provision of cellular telephone through its subsidiary,  
Cell C. Cell C has been providing mobile telephony services throughout  
South Africa since it was awarded a licence in 2001. CellSAf is an  
investment holding company with interests in 3C. Oger Telecom also has  
interests in the mobile telecommunications market through Cell C.
11. Saudi Oger is involved in telecommunications, shipping, transportation, and  
construction.  It is also involved in some architectural and construction  
projects and is regarded as a reputable contractor for prestigious

construction projects in the Middle East, Africa and Europe.
12. There is therefore no product overlap.
Conclusion
We conclude that the merger will not lead to a substantial lessening or prevention  
of competition.  
The Tribunal therefore approves the transaction unconditionally. There are no  
public interest concerns which would alter this conclusion.
__________
1 June 2005
N. Manoim    Date
Concurring: M. Moerane, D. Lewis 
For the merging parties:   H. Irvine, Deneys Reitz Attorneys
For the Commission:  H. Ratshisusu, Competition Commission