On February 1, the South African Competition Commission announced the establishment of a “fast-track settlement” process for construction firms “who have been party to collusive practices in bidding for projects in the public and private sectors.” The Commission has been conducting an investigation in the construction industry that “has uncovered widespread anticompetitive conduct through various arrangements,” such as meetings between major firms “to allocate tenders and police each other’s behaviour through a structure referred to as ‘The Party’.”
The Commission’s announcement specified that it had “devised a fast-track settlement procedure to incentivise firms to enter into a comprehensive settlement that is financially advantageous.” It invited firms “to apply for fast-track settlement with complete and truthful disclosure of information regarding collusion. In addition the firm must undertake to cooperate and cease anti-competitive conduct. Upon complying with the requirements, the Commission will settle with participating firms with a reduced administrative penalty compared to the penalty if each transgression were to be prosecuted separately.”
This post was originally published on the legacy ABA Section of Administrative Law and Regulatory Practice Notice and Comment blog, which merged with the Yale Journal on Regulation Notice and Comment blog in 2015.
On February 1, the South African Competition Commission announced the establishment of a “fast-track settlement” process for construction firms “who have been party to collusive practices in bidding for projects in the public and private sectors.” The Commission has been conducting an investigation in the construction industry that “has uncovered widespread anticompetitive conduct through various arrangements,” such as meetings between major firms “to allocate tenders and police each other’s behaviour through a structure referred to as ‘The Party’.”
The Commission’s announcement specified that it had “devised a fast-track settlement procedure to incentivise firms to enter into a comprehensive settlement that is financially advantageous.” It invited firms “to apply for fast-track settlement with complete and truthful disclosure of information regarding collusion. In addition the firm must undertake to cooperate and cease anti-competitive conduct. Upon complying with the requirements, the Commission will settle with participating firms with a reduced administrative penalty compared to the penalty if each transgression were to be prosecuted separately.”
This post was originally published on the legacy ABA Section of Administrative Law and Regulatory Practice Notice and Comment blog, which merged with the Yale Journal on Regulation Notice and Comment blog in 2015.