Full Text Available
Note: Clicking the button above will open the full text document at the original institutional repository in a new window.
The use of presumptions in determining liability for passive participation in price-fixing cartels: a comparative study
While competition authorities worldwide share a common resolve to denounce cartels, they adopt varying approaches to their prosecution and punishment. The inherent secrecy of cartels makes it a daunting task to strike the right balance in legislative and governmental intervention. For that reason, c...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Thesis |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Department of Commercial Law
2025
|
| Subjects: | |
| Tags: |
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1867613310799577089 |
|---|---|
| access_status_str | Open Access |
| author | Preller, Surita |
| author2 | Stoop, Helena |
| author_browse | Preller, Surita Stoop, Helena |
| author_facet | Stoop, Helena Preller, Surita |
| author_sort | Preller, Surita |
| collection | Thesis |
| description | While competition authorities worldwide share a common resolve to denounce cartels, they adopt varying approaches to their prosecution and punishment. The inherent secrecy of cartels makes it a daunting task to strike the right balance in legislative and governmental intervention. For that reason, courts in different jurisdictions have allowed evidentiary presumptions aimed at aiding authorities in establishing the essential elements of transgressions, particularly in cases of price-fixing. The appropriate balance between reliance on evidentiary presumptions and the burden of proof is of paramount significance in the context of price-fixing offences. Finding this balance is vital for preventing detrimental effects on competition and market dynamics. The issue considered herein is what the appropriate balance is for South African competition law, after considering the examples provided by the European Union (“EU”) and the United States of America (“US”) in their reliance on evidentiary presumptions. In the EU, the paramount focus lies on the competitive process. The EU has been developing their competition law jurisprudence on the use of presumptions for many years and the US is not far behind. South Africa has progressively incorporated concepts and practices from the EU system into its legal framework, exemplified by the introduction of the concept of public distancing as a rebuttal to the presumption of involvement in the EU. This thesis delves into the European and U.S. positions respectively, analysing the process of proving and defending price-fixing cases, including the development of presumptions. It explores the South African position and the interplay of systems to find that the South African context is unique due to historical complexities and aims of the South African Competition Act. The aim is to determine the extent to which foreign systems provide guidance for addressing the legal questions raised in the South African context. This thesis then suggests that the US model might offer a more balanced approach that aligns with South Africa's specific needs and circumstances and gives reasons for this. It is emphasised, however, that each legal system must be considered and understood as a whole before categorical rules are drawn and transplanted from one to the other as contextual differences are present. |
| format | Thesis |
| id | oai:open.uct.ac.za:11427/41237 |
| institution | University of Cape Town (South Africa) |
| language | eng |
| last_indexed | 2026-06-10T12:34:06.076Z |
| license_str | Not specified — see source repository |
| provenance_str_mv | Harvested via OAI-PMH from UCTD — University of Cape Town Open Access Repository |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| publishDateRange | 2025 |
| publishDateSort | 2025 |
| publisher | Department of Commercial Law |
| publisherStr | Department of Commercial Law |
| record_format | dspace |
| source_str | UCTD — University of Cape Town Open Access Repository |
| spelling | oai:open.uct.ac.za:11427/41237 The use of presumptions in determining liability for passive participation in price-fixing cartels: a comparative study Preller, Surita Stoop, Helena commercial law While competition authorities worldwide share a common resolve to denounce cartels, they adopt varying approaches to their prosecution and punishment. The inherent secrecy of cartels makes it a daunting task to strike the right balance in legislative and governmental intervention. For that reason, courts in different jurisdictions have allowed evidentiary presumptions aimed at aiding authorities in establishing the essential elements of transgressions, particularly in cases of price-fixing. The appropriate balance between reliance on evidentiary presumptions and the burden of proof is of paramount significance in the context of price-fixing offences. Finding this balance is vital for preventing detrimental effects on competition and market dynamics. The issue considered herein is what the appropriate balance is for South African competition law, after considering the examples provided by the European Union (“EU”) and the United States of America (“US”) in their reliance on evidentiary presumptions. In the EU, the paramount focus lies on the competitive process. The EU has been developing their competition law jurisprudence on the use of presumptions for many years and the US is not far behind. South Africa has progressively incorporated concepts and practices from the EU system into its legal framework, exemplified by the introduction of the concept of public distancing as a rebuttal to the presumption of involvement in the EU. This thesis delves into the European and U.S. positions respectively, analysing the process of proving and defending price-fixing cases, including the development of presumptions. It explores the South African position and the interplay of systems to find that the South African context is unique due to historical complexities and aims of the South African Competition Act. The aim is to determine the extent to which foreign systems provide guidance for addressing the legal questions raised in the South African context. This thesis then suggests that the US model might offer a more balanced approach that aligns with South Africa's specific needs and circumstances and gives reasons for this. It is emphasised, however, that each legal system must be considered and understood as a whole before categorical rules are drawn and transplanted from one to the other as contextual differences are present. 2025-03-25T10:08:13Z 2025-03-25T10:08:13Z 2024 2025-03-25T09:56:51Z Thesis / Dissertation Masters LLM http://hdl.handle.net/11427/41237 eng application/pdf Department of Commercial Law Faculty of Law University of Cape Town |
| spellingShingle | commercial law Preller, Surita The use of presumptions in determining liability for passive participation in price-fixing cartels: a comparative study |
| thesis_degree_str | Master's |
| title | The use of presumptions in determining liability for passive participation in price-fixing cartels: a comparative study |
| title_full | The use of presumptions in determining liability for passive participation in price-fixing cartels: a comparative study |
| title_fullStr | The use of presumptions in determining liability for passive participation in price-fixing cartels: a comparative study |
| title_full_unstemmed | The use of presumptions in determining liability for passive participation in price-fixing cartels: a comparative study |
| title_short | The use of presumptions in determining liability for passive participation in price-fixing cartels: a comparative study |
| title_sort | use of presumptions in determining liability for passive participation in price fixing cartels a comparative study |
| topic | commercial law |
| url | http://hdl.handle.net/11427/41237 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT prellersurita theuseofpresumptionsindeterminingliabilityforpassiveparticipationinpricefixingcartelsacomparativestudy AT prellersurita useofpresumptionsindeterminingliabilityforpassiveparticipationinpricefixingcartelsacomparativestudy |