Tiger Brands is starting a company-wide review to root out anti-competitive behaviour after its medical supplies company Adcock Ingram was slapped with a R53 million fine on Friday for collusive tendering.

CEO Peter Matlare said on Friday: "We are cleaning house. We are going door-to-door and cupboard-to-cupboard. We will not accept this kind of behaviour in a company such as Tiger," Matlare told reporters in Johannesburg.

"We will be a decent corporate citizen."

On Friday the Competition Commission fined Adcock Ingram Critical Care (AICC), owned by Tiger Brands, R53-million for collusive tendering.

Matlare said the allegations of AICC's collusive tendering and market allocation were "substantially correct".

Commissioned to review Tiger group

"(Law firm) Edward Nathan Sonnenbergs has been commissioned to review all of the businesses in the greater Tiger group in order to ensure that all operations are in compliance with the Competition Act, or to identify any non-compliant activity," he said.

Non-executive chairperson Lex van Vught said the company's board was "anxious" to get the results as soon as possible.

He said they should be released - at the latest - by the end of the financial year.

If anything "untoward" was found, this would be made public, said Van Vught.

Matlare said the company had already asked 2500 of its managers to sign a declaration form indicating whether they knew of any anti-competitive behaviour.

He said 2200 of the managers had said that besides the milling and healthcare matters there were "no indications of contraventions".

Barnett had been suspended

The other 200 managers had already left the organisation or were on leave.

Matlare said AICC senior executive Arthur Barnett had been suspended since February for involvement in the collusion.

Disciplinary proceedings would be initiated against him.

The company was awaiting evidence from one of the Commission's witnesses -allegedly implicating other employees of Tiger Brands - before proceeding with disciplinary action against anyone else.

"Outsider information will help us understand if other people are allegedly involved," said Matlare.

If this information was correct, "then appropriate action can be taken".

Still believed in worth of the company

Both Matlare and Van Vught said they still believed in the worth of the company despite its involvement in these anti-competitive activities.

"These are pockets of unacceptable behaviour rather than endemic," said van Vught.

He said a few dozen people out of 15 000 employees appeared to be involved.

Late last year, Tiger Brands received just under a R100-million fine for fixing the price of bread.

Adcock Ingram Critical Care admitted to "collusive tendering" over a 14-year period.

Its administrative penalty of R53 502 800 - eight percent of its turnover - was the highest penalty to date for collusive behaviour, said the commission.

Colluded with three other medical suppliers

The fine is related to a cartel operating in the medical market for the supply of intravenous medical products to hospitals.

Adcock Ingram Critical Care colluded with three other medical suppliers, Fresenius Kabi South Africa (FKSA), Thusanong and Dismed.

"They would agree amongst one another which company would tender for which product so that they would not compete with one another in the tendering processes.

"They fixed the outcome of the tendering process," Competition Commission senior analyst Nandi Mokoena told Sapa.

"The reason why this is so bad, is that they could then inflate their prices because they knew there was no other competition in the tendering process."

Sapa