Test

A operates a printing shop in Johannesburg. A has noticed that B and C operate very successful printing shops in Cape Town and Durban respectively. A approaches B and C and proposes that, since each has particular knowledge of the area in which they currently operate, A should operate exclusively in Johannesburg, B exclusively in Cape Town and C exclusively in Durban. A, B and C agree that this is a good idea. This conduct is not a contravention of section 4 of the Competition Act because it results in each printing shop developing regional expertise which are valued by customers. Thus, the benefits arising from the agreement outweigh the anti-competitive concerns.

A, a large property developer, wishes to procure a large supply of floor tiles and issues a tender for such supply. B and C, both manufacturers of these floor tiles, agree that they will quote A identical prices in their tenders, with the hopes that B and C will receive an equal share of orders. This agreement between B and C is not in contravention of section 4 of the Competition Act because it results in a fair allocation of business in the market place.

A and B are competing distributors of cigarettes. A and B agree that they will provide the same discount structure to all of their retail store customers (e.g. a 10% discount off each of their list prices). Since their list prices are different, the actual prices that A and B each charge to retail stores differ. This agreement between A and B is not in contravention of section 4 of the Competition Act because A and B actually charge different prices to their retail customers.