Competition Act, 1998 (Act No. 89 of 1998)NoticesGuidelines for the Determination of Administrative Penalties for Prohibited Practices1. Definitions |
1.1 | Unless the context indicates otherwise, the following terms are applicable to these guidelines— |
1.1.1 | "The Act" |
means the Competition Act No. 89 of 1998 (as amended);
1.1.2 | "Administrative penalty" |
means a monetary penalty that may be imposed by the Tribunal in terms of section 59 of the Act;
1.1.3 | "Affected turnover" |
means the annual turnover of the firm in the Republic and exports from the Republic based on the sales of products or services that can be said to have been affected by the contravention;2
1.1.4 | "Base amount" |
means a proportion of the affected turnover determined in accordance with the methodology stated below;
1.1.5 | "Base year" |
means the most recent financial year in which there is evidence that the firm participated in the contravention;
1.1.6 | "The CAC" |
means the Competition Appeal Court as established in terms of section 36 of the Act;
1.1.7 | "CLP" |
means the Competition Commission's Corporate Leniency Policy as defined in Notice 195 of 2004, Government Gazette No. 25963 of 6 February 2004 (as amended);
1.1.8 | "The Commission" |
means the Competition Commission, a juristic person established in terms of section 19 of the Act;
1.1.9 | "Duration" |
means the number of months or years of participation in the contravention by a firm;
1.1.10 | "Firm" |
includes a person (juristic or natural), partnership or a trust. This may include a combination of firms that form part of a single economic entity, a division and/or a business unit of a firm;
1.1.11 | "Firm's annual turnover" |
means the firm's annual turnover in the Republic and its exports from the Republic in a financial year;
1.1.12 | "Holding company" |
means holding company as defined in section 1 of the Companies Act No. 71 of 2008, as amended;
1.1.13 | "The Tribunal" |
means the Competition Tribunal, a juristic person established in terms of section 26 of the Act.
2 | See paragraph 134 of the Competition Tribunal decision in Competition Commission v. Aveng Africa Limited t/a Steeledale, Reinforcing Mesh Solutions (Pty) Ltd, Vulcania Reinforcing (Pty) Ltd & BRC Mesh Reinforcing (Pty) Ltd Case No.: 84/CR/Dec09 |