American Natural Soda Ash Corp v Botswana Ash (Pty) Ltd and Others

The appellants, American Natural Soda Ash Corp (ANSAC) and CHC Global (Pty) Ltd, were respondents in complaint proceedings before the Competition Tribunal concerning alleged cartel conduct under section 4 and predatory pricing under section 8(d)(iv) of the Competition Act 89 of 1998. During settlement negotiations with the Competition Commission, conducted on a confidential and without‑prejudice basis, a Commission employee, Darryl Dingley, participated extensively, particularly in relation to penalty calculations. After leaving the Commission, Dingley joined the law firm Webber Wentzel Bowens, which represented Botswana Ash (Pty) Ltd (Botash), an intervener in the same proceedings. Dingley was briefly assigned to Botash’s legal team. Upon discovering this, ANSAC applied to the Tribunal to disqualify Botash and its legal representatives on grounds of side‑switching, breach of confidentiality, and potential corruption of witness testimony. The Tribunal dismissed the application, finding no evidence beyond a mere possibility of harm. ANSAC appealed to the Competition Appeal Court.

The appeal was dismissed, and the Tribunal’s decision refusing to disqualify Botash and its legal representatives was confirmed.

The case clarifies South African law on legal‑team disqualification, particularly in competition proceedings, by confirming that speculative or hypothetical risks of prejudice are insufficient. It distinguishes true side‑switching cases from situations involving movement between parties with aligned or complementary interests and affirms a cautious, evidence‑based approach to disqualification applications grounded in confidentiality and professional ethics.