The Competition Act 89 of 1998 prohibits abuse of its dominance by a firm that is dominant within a specific market. The abuse of dominance prohibitions are set out in section 8 of the Act. This dissertation focuses on section 8(b) which prohibits a dominant firm from refusing to give access to an essential facility that belongs to the dominant firm or to which the dominant firm has access, in circumstances where it is economically feasible for the dominant firm to provide such access. The concept of an “essential facility” is problematic in South African competition law and this dissertation probes into the characteristics of such a facility and the requirements of proving a contravention of section 8(b). A comparative study of the US and EU is undertaken and it is eventually concluded that the South African Competition Authorities should lean more towards the US approach to the essential facilities prohibition. / Dissertation (LLM)--University of Pretoria, 2013. / gm2014 / Mercantile Law / unrestricted
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:netd.ac.za/oai:union.ndltd.org:up/oai:repository.up.ac.za:2263/37365 |
| Date | January 2013 |
| Creators | Nkuna, Ignatius Lebogang |
| Contributors | Van Heerden, C.M. (Corlia), none |
| Source Sets | South African National ETD Portal |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Mini Dissertation |
| Rights | © 2013 University of Pretoria. All rights reserved. The copyright in this work vests in the University of Pretoria. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, without the prior written permission of the University of Pretoria. |
Page generated in 0.002 seconds