Opt-in class action for damages vindicated by constitutional court
The history behind the above proceedings in the constitutional court is briefly as follows. The applicant in this matter (also referred to as "Mukaddam" where appropriate) and two other parties brought an application in the Western Cape high court against Pioneer Foods (Pty) Ltd ("Pio...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Published: |
Juta & Company Ltd. * Juta Law
2013
|
| Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/53882 |
| _version_ | 1848759251098402816 |
|---|---|
| author | De Vos, Wouter |
| author_facet | De Vos, Wouter |
| author_sort | De Vos, Wouter |
| building | Curtin Institutional Repository |
| collection | Online Access |
| description | The history behind the above proceedings in the constitutional court is briefly as follows. The applicant in this matter (also referred to as "Mukaddam" where appropriate) and two other parties brought an application in the Western Cape high court against Pioneer Foods (Pty) Ltd ("Pioneer"), Tiger Consumer Brands Ltd ("Tiger") and Premier Foods Ltd ("Premier"), all major manufacturers of bread, in which they sought leave to launch a class action for damages on an opt-in basis on behalf of approximately 100 distributors of bread in the Western Cape against the respondents. (This was referred to as "the distributor application".) This application in the high court was heard together with a similar application against the respondents, brought simultaneously by NGOs and other parties purporting to act on behalf of the consumers of bread in the Western Cape and elsewhere. (This was referred to as "the consumer application".) These proceedings flowed from the three respondents' contravention of the Competition Act (89 of 1998) by colluding to fix the price of bread, to reduce the discount given to the distributors and to implement other restrictive practices, as established in proceedings before the competition tribunal. Substantial fines were imposed on Pioneer and Tiger, whilst corporate leniency was extended to Premier because it had co-operated with the competition commission in its investigation of the matter. |
| first_indexed | 2025-11-14T09:56:54Z |
| format | Journal Article |
| id | curtin-20.500.11937-53882 |
| institution | Curtin University Malaysia |
| institution_category | Local University |
| last_indexed | 2025-11-14T09:56:54Z |
| publishDate | 2013 |
| publisher | Juta & Company Ltd. * Juta Law |
| recordtype | eprints |
| repository_type | Digital Repository |
| spelling | curtin-20.500.11937-538822018-01-17T02:54:36Z Opt-in class action for damages vindicated by constitutional court De Vos, Wouter The history behind the above proceedings in the constitutional court is briefly as follows. The applicant in this matter (also referred to as "Mukaddam" where appropriate) and two other parties brought an application in the Western Cape high court against Pioneer Foods (Pty) Ltd ("Pioneer"), Tiger Consumer Brands Ltd ("Tiger") and Premier Foods Ltd ("Premier"), all major manufacturers of bread, in which they sought leave to launch a class action for damages on an opt-in basis on behalf of approximately 100 distributors of bread in the Western Cape against the respondents. (This was referred to as "the distributor application".) This application in the high court was heard together with a similar application against the respondents, brought simultaneously by NGOs and other parties purporting to act on behalf of the consumers of bread in the Western Cape and elsewhere. (This was referred to as "the consumer application".) These proceedings flowed from the three respondents' contravention of the Competition Act (89 of 1998) by colluding to fix the price of bread, to reduce the discount given to the distributors and to implement other restrictive practices, as established in proceedings before the competition tribunal. Substantial fines were imposed on Pioneer and Tiger, whilst corporate leniency was extended to Premier because it had co-operated with the competition commission in its investigation of the matter. 2013 Journal Article http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/53882 Juta & Company Ltd. * Juta Law restricted |
| spellingShingle | De Vos, Wouter Opt-in class action for damages vindicated by constitutional court |
| title | Opt-in class action for damages vindicated by constitutional court |
| title_full | Opt-in class action for damages vindicated by constitutional court |
| title_fullStr | Opt-in class action for damages vindicated by constitutional court |
| title_full_unstemmed | Opt-in class action for damages vindicated by constitutional court |
| title_short | Opt-in class action for damages vindicated by constitutional court |
| title_sort | opt-in class action for damages vindicated by constitutional court |
| url | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/53882 |