South Africa takes GE, Siemens and Philips units to Tribunal over scanner repairs

South Africa's Competition Commission has referred local units of GE, Siemens and Philips to the Competition Tribunal for prosecution, alleging that they shut independent engineers out of the servicing, repair and maintenance of diagnostic medical imaging equipment. The referral, announced on 8 October, names GE South Africa (Pty) Ltd, GE Medical Systems South Africa (Pty) Ltd, Siemens Healthcare (Pty) Ltd and Philips South Africa Commercial (Pty) Ltd, according to the Commission's statement.

The case came three days after the Commission gazetted final guidelines on repair, service and maintenance aftermarkets, which list medical equipment and devices among the products covered, its statement of 5 October shows. Taken together, the two documents set out how the authority intends to treat manufacturers that control access to parts, software and information after a sale.

The allegations

The respondents supply and service X-ray, ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT) and PET/CT systems nationwide. The Commission's investigation revealed allegations that they denied or restricted independent clinical engineers' access to the spare parts, diagnostic software, service keys, technical information and specialised training needed to compete with them in the aftermarket, according to the referral statement.

The Commission alleges that the conduct contravenes section 8(1)(c), alternatively section 8(1)(d)(ii), of the Competition Act 89 of 1998, and says the restrictions contribute to higher costs and fewer repair options for healthcare facilities. The Commission's own guidance on abuse of dominance describes refusal to supply scarce goods to a competitor as one form of exclusionary act, and notes that the Act prohibits the abuse of a dominant position, not the holding of one. It adds that the hurdle for proving such cases is significant, requiring proof both that the respondent is dominant and that it is abusing that dominance.

The Tribunal will decide whether the companies contravened the Act and, if so, impose remedies, the statement says. The respondents' positions are not set out in the statement, and the allegations have not been tested.

The Commission frames the case around public health. It says imaging systems cost millions of rand and typically stay in service for 10 to 15 years, so timely access to software updates, spare parts, preventive maintenance and repairs is essential to extend their life and contain costs. It says the impact of downtime is especially severe in public and rural facilities, and links access to working equipment to the constitutional right of access to healthcare services, according to the statement.

The guidelines behind it

The final Guidelines on Repair, Service and Maintenance Aftermarkets were published under section 79 of the Act after public consultation, and cover mobile phones, tablets, gaming consoles and other electronics, televisions, household appliances, medical equipment and devices, and back-up water and electricity systems, the Commission said. Motor vehicles are excluded because a separate set of guidelines already covers the automotive aftermarket.

The guidelines name practices that may harm competition, including blocking access to spare parts or repair information, preventing independent repairers from entering or growing in the market, and pressuring consumers not to use an independent repairer. They do not create obligations beyond those in the Act. The Commission says it will assess each complaint on its own facts under sections 5, 8 or 9 of the Act, and will consider justifications such as consumer safety, improved technology or efficiency, protection of intellectual property and compliance with other laws, according to the statement. The guidelines mostly apply to repairs not covered by a statutory, implied or express warranty, and may also apply to a specific repair a warranty does not cover. The full text is on the Commission's guidelines page.

The Commission has invited service providers to report manufacturers that frustrate their ability to provide services. For multinational equipment makers selling into South Africa, the guidelines and the imaging case together make after-sales policy a local competition question.

Why it matters beyond South Africa

Right-to-repair rules are usually discussed in the context of Europe and North America. South Africa's approach uses existing competition law rather than a dedicated repair statute: the guidelines carry no new obligations, and the imaging case runs through existing provisions of the Act. Guidance followed by enforcement under existing law is a route other competition authorities could take without new legislation.

The imaging referral is one of several recent actions listed on the Commission's 2026 releases page, which on 7 October also shows a prosecution of Premier Group Limited and RFG and, on 3 July, the referral of Audatex to the Tribunal. The imaging statement gives no hearing date.