Santam Ltd / Kagiso Newco and Nova Group Holdings Ltd (32/LM/May05) [2005] ZACT 52; [2005] 2 CPLR 594 (CT) (4 August 2005)

70 Reportability
Competition Law

Brief Summary

Competition — Merger Approval — Unconditional approval of merger between Santam Ltd and Kagiso Newco with Nova Group Holdings Ltd — The Competition Tribunal issued a Merger Clearance Certificate on 29 June 2005, finding that the merger would not substantially prevent or lessen competition in the relevant markets — The merger involved Santam acquiring the entire issued share capital of Nova Group while Kagiso Newco acquired a 33.3% stake, creating synergies between the merging parties — No significant public interest concerns were identified that would affect the approval of the merger.

COMPETITION TRIBUNAL 
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA
Case no: 32/LM/May05
In The Large Merger Between: 
Santam Ltd & Kagiso Newco                                                      Acquiring  
Firm
And
Nova Group Holdings Ltd                                        Target Firm
Reasons for Decision 
APPROVAL
1. On   29   June   2005   the   Competition   Tribunal   issued   a   Merger   Clearance   Certificate  
unconditionally approving the merger between Santam Ltd and Kagiso Newco and the  
Nova Group Holdings Ltd.
THE TRANSACTION 
2. The parties to this merger are Santam Ltd (“Santam”) and Kagiso Newco and the Nova  
Group Holdings Ltd (“Nova Group”). 1   Sanlam holds approximately 53% of the issued  
share   capital   in   Santam. 2    Kagiso   Newco   is   a   wholly   owned   subsidiary   of   Kagiso  
Treasury Services (Pty) Ltd (“KTS”). 
3. The Nova Group together with its shareholders and Santam entered into a shareholders  
agreement in terms of which Santam acquired the entire issued share capital and claims  
against the Nova Group, and Santam sold the entire issued share capital of its wholly  
owned subsidiary Santam Risk Finance Limited (“SRFL”) to the Nova Group. In turn,  
Kagiso Newco acquired 33.3% of the entire issued share capital in and claims against  
the Nova Group.  Post­merger, Santam and Kagiso Newco would hold 66.7% and 33.3%  
in the Nova Group respectively. 
RATIONALE FOR THE TRANSACTION
4. The stated commercial rationale for the proposed transaction is the creation of synergies  
between the merging parties’ businesses as they complement each other. Nova Group’s  
1  Nova Group’s shareholders are the Munchener Ruckversicherungs­Gesellschaft Aftiengsellschaft  
(“Munich Re”), Munich Reinsurance Company of Africa Ltd (“MroA”), Capital Alliance Holdings Ltd  
(“CAL”) and Share Incentive Scheme.
2  See page 2 of the transcript of 29 June 2005.
  1

shareholders are currently exiting their non­core investments hence the present deal. 3 
The merging parties’ activities
5. Santam provides short­term insurance policies for all classes of business including
alternative risk transfer (“ART”).  It provides its ART business which consists of both cell­
captive4  and   rent­a­captive   products, 5  through   SRFL.     It   also   controls   underwriting  
managers. Santam’s parent company, Sanlam, is a registered long­term insurer which  
provides  long­term  insurance  polices  and  also  some  ART  based  long­term insurance  
products. 
6. Kagiso Newco is a newly formed company not trading at the moment. However, there  
exist a number of firms within the Kagiso Group offering a diverse range of products.  
Both   Kagiso   Treasury   Services   and   Kagiso   Treasury   Solutions   provide   treasury  
services.   Kagiso Risk Solutions is the current holder of a short­term insurance licence  
which   permits   it   to   provide   cell   captive   and   rent­a­captive   product,   but   it   has   never  
traded.     Kagiso   Trust   Investments   (Pty)   Ltd   (“KTI”)   has   a   10%   shareholding   in  
Metropolitan   Life   (“Metropolitan”),   a   long­term   insurer.     However,   KTI   does   not   have  
control of Metropolitan. 
7. The Nova Group, a target firm, is a holding company which provides goods or services  
through its  subsidiaries  Nova  Risk  and  Nova  Life.   The former is  a  short­term insurer  
which   primarily   offers   cell   captive   products   and   underwriting   management   of   various  
classes of insurance. It also provides rent­a­captive products to a limited/lesser extent.  
The latter company provides cell captive life assurance products in terms of the long  
term insurance licence.
COMPETITION ANALYSIS
Relevant Market
Product market
3  Paragraph 3 at page 4 of the Commission’s Competitiveness Report.
4  According to the Commission, a cell captive insurer operates on the basis that each client is issued

with a cell and each cell carries a different dividend entitlement relating to the insurance business of a  
particular cell and is issued to the cell owners with appropriate and negotiated level of share premium  
that provides the requisite solvency of the cell captive insurer to underwrite. The issued share capital,  
share   premium   and   retained   earnings   comprise   the   solvency   capacity   of   each   cell   to   fund   the  
particular insurance business of the particular cell owner and will differ across the cells. Further to  
this, Cell owners can use separate cells to separate cells to sell third party insurance.
5  We were told that rent­a­captive is a variation of captive insurer and entails a large corporation  
insuring its aggregate deductible where it believes that only a continued bad claims experience will  
result   in   the   deductible   being   exceeded.   In  this   case,   deductible   is   paid   to   a  rent­a­captive   as   a  
premium.   The   corporation   will   then   pay   its   deductible   responsibilities   up   to   the   amount   of   the  
aggregate deductible out of the rent­a­captive; thereafter the insurer bears the losses up to an agreed  
limit. 
  2

8. Both firms operate in the short and long term insurance markets. Within the short­term  
insurance market, in addition to the provision of insurance business through underwriting  
managers,   they   both   offer   ART   (cell   captive   and   rent­a­captive)   products.   Within   the  
long­term insurance, they offer some ART based long term insurance products, i.e., cell  
captive   products.   It   is   therefore   clear   that   product   overlaps   exist   in   respect   of   the  
provision   of   cell   captive   and   rent­a­captive   short   term   ART   products,   underwriting  
management,   and   in   the   provision   of   cell   captive   ART   based   long   term   insurance  
products.
9. As previously defined by the Tribunal, 6  ART products are a specialised form of short 
term insurance, a non­conventional, more creative and flexible method of financing risk.  
The Commission contended that short­term cell captive and rent­a­captive constitutes a  
market on its own in that an insurer is required to have a licence to provide short­term  
ART   cell  captive   and  rent­a­captive  products.   Both  the  Commission   and  the merging  
parties contended that ART, which is another form of short­term insurance, is a separate  
market from the traditional short­term insurance. 7 
10. The   merger   filing   reflected   that   both   Santam   and   Nova   Group   conduct   insurance  
business through underwriting managers. Although they are involved in the underwriting  
management   business,   there   seem   to   be   some   differences   between   them.   Santam  
controls underwriting managers who underwrite specialist classes of insurance business  
on its behalf whereas Nova Group does not control these underwriting managers. The  
Commission contended that underwriting agencies operate in a particular line of short­
term insurance to the extent that their operations can only substitute each other if they

term insurance to the extent that their operations can only substitute each other if they  
operate in the same niche. According to the Commission, if an underwriting agent has  
developed expertise and specialised knowledge in crop insurance his skills will not be  
applicable in marine work and vice versa.   In light of this, the Commission viewed the  
relevant underwriting management market as peculiar to the specialised niche services  
offered   by   the   parties,   such   as   motor,   transportation,   accident,   health   and   property  
guarantee, liability, engineering and miscellaneous. 
11. Insofar as the long­term ART product is concerned, the Commission defined the relevant  
market as the long­term cell captive market. 
12. We need not make a definitive finding on the relevant product market because, in our  
view,   the   transaction   would   not   result   in   the   substantial   prevention   or   lessening   of  
competition regardless of any market definition adopted.
Geographic market
13. According to the parties, the ART products are structured in a global environment. We  
were told that about 50% of the worldwide ART business is generated in New York. The  
parties contended that South Africa’s ART market is relatively new although it has grown  
6  See   the   Tribunal’s   previous   decision:   Santam   Ltd   and   Allianz   Insurance   Ltd ,   Case   No.:  
28/LM/May02.  
7  See the Commission’s Report, page 6.
  3

significantly   in   recent   years.   The   Commission   argued   that   the   relevant   geographic  
market appears to be international.  
Market shares 
 
14. According   to   the   market   share   data   submitted   by   the   Commission   and   the   merging  
parties,   both   Nova   Risk   Partners   Ltd   and   Santam   Risk   Finance   Ltd   would   have   a  
combined market share in short­term cell captive and rent­a­captive market of 22% on  
par with that of RMB Structured Insurance Ltd. Guardrisk Insurance Company was the  
top market leader with 40% market share whilst M&F Risk Financing Ltd enjoys only 9%.  
In the long­term cell captive insurance market, the merged entity (i.e., Nova Life Partners  
and Sanlam Customised Insurance) would have about 12% market shares. The other  
significant   players   are   Momentum   Mobility   (36%),   AIG   Life   South   Africa   (33%)   and  
Guardrisk Life (20%). Also apparent from the market share figures is that Nova enjoys a  
relatively   low   market   shares   in   the   underwriting   management   of   various   classes   of  
insurance.8
Public Interest
15. According   to   the   merging   parties   seven   (7)   employees   would   be   affected   by   the  
proposed transaction as it would result in the duplication of services within Nova Group  
and Santam. They contended that these affected employees are very marketable in the  
financial   sector   and   would   be   likely   to   find   alternative   jobs.   The   parties   gave   an  
undertaking at the hearing that the affected employees would not be more than five (5)  
and that they would try to absorb them into Santam 9   They further submitted that the  
deal   was   pro­BEE   as   it   created   an   opportunity   for   Kagiso   Trust,   a   pre­eminent  
empowerment   investment   banking   services   group,   to   obtain   shares   in   the   insurance  
market.10 
Conclusion

market.10 
Conclusion 
16. The   Tribunal   is   satisfied   that   it   is   unlikely   that   the   merger   will   lead   to   lessening   or  
prevention of competition in the relevant markets. There are no significant public interest  
issues which would alter our conclusion.
     
Y Carrim          04 August 2005 
Concurring: U Bhoola, M Mokuena
8  Paragraph 7.3, page 8 of the Commission’s Competitiveness Report.
9  See page 5 of the transcript, 29 June 2005. 
10  Page 15 and 46 of the record. 
  4

For the merging parties: Ms Coreen Fouch é (Jan S De Villiers Attorneys). 
For the Commission:  Edwell Mtantato (Mergers and Acquisitions).
  5