Acucap Properties Limited and Intaprop Investment (Pty) Ltd (95/LM/Sep07) [2007] ZACT 80 (29 October 2007)

70 Reportability
Competition Law

Brief Summary

Competition — Merger approval — Acucap Properties Limited acquiring Intaprop Investments (Pty) Ltd — Acucap, a property loan stock company, seeks to diversify its portfolio by acquiring 100% of Intaprop’s issued share capital — The merger results in Acucap gaining sole control over Intaprop and its subsidiaries — The merger does not significantly lessen competition in the relevant markets, with combined market shares remaining low — Tribunal approves the merger without conditions, finding no significant public interest issues.

COMPETITION TRIBUNAL OF SOUTH AFRICA
                   Case No: 95/LM/Sep07
In the matter between:
ACUCAP PROPERTIES LIMITED                                                              Acquiring Firm
And
INTAPROP INVESTMENT (PTY) LTD                                                            Target Firm
_______________________________________________________________
Panel    :        U Bhoola (Presiding Member), Y Carrim (Tribunal 
Member), and M Holden (Tribunal Member)
Heard on    : 17 October 2007
Decided on    : 17 October 2007 
Reasons issued on :   29 October 2007  
REASONS FOR DECISION
APPROVAL
[1]       On   17   October   2007,   the   Tribunal   approved   the   merger   between   Acucap  
Properties Limited ( “Acucap”), and Intaprop Investments (Pty) Ltd ( “Intaprop”).
THE TRANSACTION
[2]   Acucap, the primary acquiring firm, is a property loan stock company listed in the  
JSE Limited. It is not controlled by any firm. It controls a number of firms.

[3]   Intaprop, the primary target firm, is not controlled by any firm. It controls Intabrink  
Investments (Pty) Limited and Illovo Boulevard Piazzas (Pty) Limited.
  [4]     In terms of the Sale of Shares Agreement, Acucap is acquiring 100% of  
Intaprop’s issued share capital from its ordinary share holders. 1 The transaction  
will result in Acucap acquiring sole control over Intaprop and its subsidiaries, namely  
Intabrink Investments (Pty) Ltd and Illovo Boulevard Piazzas (Pty) Limited.
RATIONALE FOR THE TRANSACTION
[5]   Acucap, which is primarily involved in retail property, wants to diversify its portfolio  
through the acquisition of Grade A office property from Intaprop.
THE PARTIES’ ACTIVITIES
[6]   The primary acquiring firm is active in the market for the provision of rentable retail,  
office, and industrial space. It owns 16 retail properties, 2 48 office properties 3 and 11  
industrial   properties   country   wide.   In   addition,   through   its   wholly   owned   subsidiary,  
Atlas   Properties   Limited   ( “Atlas”),   Acucap   provides   property   asset   management,  
broking; project management and property development services.
[7]   The target firm is active in the market for rentable retail and office property. It has  
two  retail properties, 4  and seven  grade A office properties. Both  of the target firm’s  
properties are situated in Gauteng.
THE RELEVANT MARKET
1  The ordinary shareholders are: The Pendennis Investment Trust; The Windermere Investment  
Trust; The Unity Trust; The Zambezi Trust; and Neville Dale Gordon. 
2  This includes 1 local convenience in Westville, Durban; 7 neighbourhood retail properties; 6  
community retail properties; 1 minor retail property; and 1 supper regional retail property.
3  This includes 23 Grade A office properties held throughout South Africa.
4  One of which is a local convenience.
  2

[8]       The   broad   market   is   that   of   retail   and   office   property.     The   merging   parties’  
activities overlap in two narrower markets, namely retail local convenience market and  
the market for rentable Grade A office space. In the retail local convenience market, the  
acquiring firm has a local convenience property in Westville, Durban and the target firm  
has one in Illovo, Gauteng. However, since the properties are situated in different areas  
there is no geographic overlap in the activities of the parties in this market. 
[9]   In the market for rentable Grade A office space, the acquiring firm has twenty three  
properties, five of these are located in the Sandton node. The primary target firm has  
seven   Grade   A   office   properties   in   the   Sandton   node.   Hence   the   only   relevant  
horizontal market for competition evaluation is the market for rentable Grade A office  
space in the Sandton node.
[10]   The transaction will also result in a vertical integration. The acquiring firm, through  
Atlas, carries on the business of property asset management, project management and  
property development, while the target firm does not.
  
COMPETITION ANALYSIS
[11]     The acquiring and target firms’ market shares pre­merger are 1.2% and 2.3%,  
respectively. The merged entity is estimated to have a relatively low market share of  
3.5% post merger. The market share accretion is low and the transaction is unlikely to  
substantially prevent or lessen competition.
[12]   There is a vertical dimension to the transaction in that Acucap via Atlas provides  
property asset management; broking; project management; and property development  
services to property owners. The target firm does not provide these services.  However,  
the   target   firm   purchases   such   services   from   Kagiso   Property   Development   (Pty)  
Limited   (“Kagiso”).   Kagiso   does   not   provide   its   services   to   the   open   market   but

provides them exclusively to the target firm for its internal portfolio.  
  3

[13]   Given   the   above,   it   is   our   view   that   this   transaction   is   unlikely   to   lead   to   a  
substantial lessening or prevention of competition.
CONCLUSION
[14]    We find that the transaction does not raise any significant public interest issues  
and accordingly approve the merger without conditions. 
_______________                                                                   29 October 2007
Y Carrim                                                                                             Date   
U Bhoola and M Holden concurring.
Tribunal Researcher                       :        P S Munyai
For the merging parties                   :       Vani Chetty Competition Law 
                                                                 (Proprietary) Limited
For the Competition Commission    :        M Dasarath and HB Senekal
                                                                 (Mergers & Acquisitions)
  4