Administrative fines paid by companies for contravening the Competition Act has surpassed R311-million so far this year, says a competition law expert.

The Competition Commission has heard cases in recent months from various industries.

"The commission is extremely active at present, and not only investigates complaints from customers and competitors but also initiates its own investigations, particularly in priority sectors like food, telecoms and construction," said Heather Irvine, director of competition law at Deneys Reitz.

Irvine said that since 1999, when the act came into operation, administrative fines paid by companies for contravening the act amounted to about R1.783-billion.

In terms of section 59(2)of the Competition Act, a fine levied in terms of the act may not exceed 10% of a company's annual turnover in South Africa and its exports from the country during the company's preceding financial year.

Irvine said that recent years saw large fines levied on companies, with the biggest in percentage terms being the 10% levied on Pioneer Food Group in February. The case is under appeal.

The Competition Tribunal fined Pioneer Foods R196-million for its role in a bread price-fixing cartel.

However, the commission then launched an appeal requesting a R1.5-billion penalty.

The penalty amounted to 10% of Pioneer's baking unit, Sasko's bread turnover in eight provinces, and 9.5% of its turnover in the Western Cape.

Irvine said that since the implementation of the act , most parties had elected to settle with the commission to avoid protracted and costly tribunal litigation.

She said the highest penalty was R691.8-million, which Mittal Steel SA had to pay after a complaint by Harmony in 2007. "However, the tribunal's decision was appealed and the parties settled."

Last month, Cape Concrete was ordered to pay a penalty of R4.37-million for its involvement in a cartel in the precast concrete market within South Africa.

The tribunal confirmed a settlement agreement after Cape Concrete admitted that it had contravened the Competition Act through a series of meetings with its competitors by fixing prices, price increases and discounts, allocating customers, territories and specific goods among themselves and engaging in collusive tendering in the markets for pipes.

Also last month, the Competition Tribunal confirmed a negotiated settlement agreement relating to indirect price-fixing and collusion in the plastics polymers market.

Plastics manufacturer Safripol admitted that a supply agreement with energy group Sasol amounted to indirect price-fixing.

The company had also engaged with Sasol in collusive conduct as a result of the implementation of the supply agreement, which included the operation of the pricing formula and the exchange of information relating to the pricing of polypropylene.

Safripol agreed to pay an administrative penalty of R16.48-million, which represents 1.5% of Safripol's total turnover for its financial year ending 2009 for turnover derived from polypropylene products.

In the same month, Aveng (Africa), trading as Duraset, agreed to pay a penalty of R21.9-million, representing 5%, of its 2008 annual turnover after admitting it took part in a mining roof bolts cartel.