Namibia 2003
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Score = 22
Governed by: Law No. 92 Promulgation of Competition Act, 2003 of the Parliament of Namibia (hereinafter referred to as “Competition Act”). [1]
| Category | Subcategory | Score | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|
| Scope | Extraterritoriality | 1 | Article 3 says that the Act applies to all economic activity having an effect in Namibia. |
| Remedies | Fines | 1 | Article 53 says that the court can impose fines for certain violations of the Act. |
| Prison Sentences | 0 | ||
| Divestitures | 1 | Article 51 provides for divestiture if a merger was completed outside of the guidelines listed in Article 44. | |
| Private Enforcement | 3rd Party Initiation | 1 | Article 33(1) says that an investigation can be initiated upon receipt of a complaint from any person. |
| Remedies Available to 3rd Parties | 1 | Article 54 allows for civil actions by private parties. | |
| 3rd Party Rights in Proceedings | 0 | ||
| Merger Notification | Voluntary | 0 | |
| Mandatory | 3 | Article 44(1) says that all proposed mergers must be notified to the Commission before they occur. | |
| Pre-merger | 2 | Article 44(1) says that all proposed mergers must be notified to the Commission before they occur. | |
| Post-merger | 0 | ||
| Merger Assessment | Dominance | 1 | Article 47(2)(b) lists the creation of a dominant position as a factor to consider in merger assessment. |
| Restriction of Competition | 1 | Article 47(2)(a) lists restriction of competition as a factor to consider in merger assessment. | |
| Public Interest (Pro D) | 1 | Article 47(2)(c) lists the possible benefits of the merger to the public interest as a factor to consider in merger assessment. | |
| Public Interest (Pro Authority) | 0 | ||
| Other | 1 | Article 47(2)(f) lists the extent to which the merger would affect the ability of undertakings owned by historically disadvantaged groups to operate and compete as a factor to consider in merger assessment. | |
| Efficiency | 1 | Article 47(2)(h) lists the benefits relating to efficiency in production and distribution as a factor to consider in merger assessment. | |
| Dominance | Limits Access | 1 | Article 26(2)(b) prohibits limiting production and market access. |
| Abusive Acts | 1 | Article 26(1) prohibits the abuse of a dominant position. | |
| Price Setting | 1 | Article 26(2)(a) lists price setting as an abuse of dominant position. | |
| Discriminatory Pricing | 1 | Article 26(2)(c) prohibits applying dissimilar conditions to equivalent transactions. | |
| Resale Price Maintenance | 1 | Article 23(3)(d) prohibits RPM. | |
| Obstacles to Entry | 0 | ||
| Efficiency Defense | 1 | Article 28(3)(c) says that agreements can be exempted from the Article 23 and 26 prohibitions if they improve production or distribution of goods and (d) allows an exemption if it promotes technical or economic progress. | |
| Restrictive Trade Practices | Price Fixing | 1 | Article 23(3)(a) prohibits price fixing. |
| Tying | 1 | Article 23(3)(g) prohibits tying arrangements. | |
| Market Division | 1 | Article 23(3)(b) prohibits market division. | |
| Output Restraint | 1 | Article 23(3)(e) prohibits limiting or controlling production. | |
| Market Sharing | 0 | ||
| Eliminating Competitors | 1 | Article 23 prohibits "undertakings which have as their object or effect the prevention or substantial lessening of competition." | |
| Collusive Tendering/Bid-Rigging | 1 | Article 23(c) prohibits collusive tendering. | |
| Supply Refusal | 0 | ||
| Efficiency Defense | 1 | Article 28(3)(c) says that agreements can be exempted from the Article 23 and 26 prohibitions if they improve production or distribution of goods and (d) allows an exemption if it promotes technical or economic progress. |