Includes bibliographical references. / Following the introduction of the margin squeeze cause of action into South African competition law jurisprudence, the question arises whether the Senwes decisions, have definitively clarified the criteria against which future margin squeeze abuse cases will be dealt with and whether these criteria have evolved into a standalone cause of action. This dissertation will demonstrate the absurdity of the Constitutional Court decision, to delete all references to margin squeeze in the decision of the Competition Tribunal which it upheld while retaining the underlying criteria against which future margins queeze cases will be adjudicated. This dissertation will additionally demonstrate that the Senwes cases, in particular the Tribunal decision read with the Constitutional Court decision, have on the one hand only marginally delineated and elaborated on the elements necessary to establish a margin squeeze abuse, but have on the other hand established margin squeeze as a standalone cause of action in terms of which offending firms can be prosecuted in South African competition jurisprudence.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:netd.ac.za/oai:union.ndltd.org:uct/oai:localhost:11427/12919 |
| Date | January 2014 |
| Creators | Kituri, Peter Maganga |
| Contributors | Kelly, Luke |
| Publisher | University of Cape Town, Faculty of Law, Department of Public Law |
| Source Sets | South African National ETD Portal |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Master Thesis, Masters, LLM |
| Format | application/pdf |
Page generated in 0.0024 seconds