Abstract
This paper examines how public interest tests are applied in South African merger control, with a primary focus on intermediate mergers. Although there is a substantial amount of research on larger mergers, there is a noticeable empirical gap in the category of intermediate mergers. To close this gap, this study investigates two main research questions: firstly, “Do intermediate mergers have an impact on the merger duration?” and secondly. “What is the relationship between the probability of merger approval and public interest considerations in South Africa?”
This study analyses a stratified random sample of 578 intermediate merger rulings from the South African Competition Commission and Competition Tribunal between 2006 and 2020 using a quantitative, empirical methodology. The study analyses the data and tests the hypotheses using various statistical models, such as logistic regression. The results presented in this study show that public interest considerations have a real influence on merger outcomes. Specifically, the data indicates that concerns about employment and small company competitiveness increase the likelihood of approving a merger subject to conditions. On the other hand, the analysis indicates that public interest considerations are the main catalysts for regulatory remedies in these situations, while competition concerns do not always lead to the imposition of requirements.
The study's findings have important ramifications for businesses and policymakers alike. In addition to giving businesses vital information about the elements that are most likely to cause problems and extend the merger approval process, it provides legislators hard data demonstrating the efficacy of the public interest mandate. This study adds to a more thorough understanding of South Africa's distinct merger control strategy and emphasizes the nation's dedication to utilizing competition law as a tool for more extensive socioeconomic change.