Bibliographie sélective OHADA

In South Africa compliance with competition law has become a major concern for firms that achieve and maintain certain levels of success and growth in the market, as their actions are often a source of complaints and litigation by rivals and competition authorities. With substantial financial penalties often levied against them for a variety of conduct deemed to constitute an abuse of their market position, dominant firms must constantly be aware of the likely impact of their business strategies and actions on both rivals and consumers. What were once thought to be normal and economically sound business practices and decisions, such as cutting prices to attract customers, have now acquired new meanings, with devastating consequences for dominant firms. So, are dominant firms under attack from competition law? In this study I aim to determine this. I track the historical development of competition law in three jurisdictions: South Africa, America, and the EU, with the aim of identifying traces, if any, of hostility towards dominant firms in the origins of competition law. I further investigate whether the formulation and enforcement of certain aspects of existing abuse of dominance provisions manifest as hostility towards dominant firms. While acknowledging the important role that competition law enforcement plays in promoting competition and enhancing consumer welfare, I conclude that significant unjustified economic and legal prejudice is suffered by dominant firms as a result of the way in which certain abuse of dominance provisions have been formulated and applied. I also offer appropriate recommendations.

Little attention is paid to the civil remedies available when infringement of a trade mark or the right to goodwill occurs. Yet, for the owners of ~uch rights, these remedies are of much greater importance than theoretical considerations regarding the nature of the rights or what constitutes their infringement. This thesis analyses the civil remedies for trade mark infringement granted by the South African Trade Marks Act 194 of 1993. In the South African context, any consideration of civil remedies is rendered problematic by the attempted graft of English remedies onto a legal system with a different common-law background. It is, therefore, essential first to trace the English origin and application of these remedies, and then to determine whether each remedy is acceptable in terms of the South African common law. This is necessary, as our courts have previously rejected or adapted English remedies which were unknown to our common law but which Parliament introduced in legislation. The remedies of interdict (or injunction) in final and interlocutory form, compensatory damages, reasonable royalties, and delivery up are analysed from a substantive law and a procedural perspective. The procedural innovation of an inquiry as to damages is also considered. In respect of each remedy, (1) the English roots and development of the remedy are traced; (2) differences of approach in two other Commonwealth jurisdictions, Australia and Canada, are highlighted; (3) the development of the South African equivalent is detailed; and (4) suggestions for the future implementation of the remedy in South Africa are made. In the penultimate chapter, our common law and legislation (including the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa 108 of 1996 ) are measured against the requirements of the Agreement on Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). Recommendations for the effective utilization of each remedy in South Africa are then made. They include suggestions for legislative amendment in respect of delivery up and an inquiry as to damages, and the introduction of statutory damages as an further civil remedy.