A heated legal battle is brewing over Shell’s proposed $1 billion sale of its downstream fuel operations in South Africa, threatening to derail the energy giant’s strategic exit from the country’s petroleum retail sector.
At the center of the dispute is a rift between prominent South African business figures and allegations of backroom dealings in one of the most high-profile corporate transactions of the year.
Background to the Deal
Shell, which operates around 600 service stations across South Africa and commands roughly 10% of the retail fuel market, announced earlier this year its intention to divest from its downstream operations.
The move is in line with Shell’s global strategy to pivot away from fuel retailing and refocus on upstream energy ventures and cleaner technologies.
To facilitate the deal, Swiss commodity trader Gunvor was selected as the main buyer, with the transaction valued at over $1 billion.
As part of South Africa’s Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) policy requirements, Gunvor was expected to partner with a local empowerment group. That’s where the controversy begins.
Initially, Gunvor entered into talks with Afrifund Investments, a firm led by former Telkom CEO Sipho Maseko, to act as its BEE partner. However, Gunvor later dropped Afrifund and brought in Matasis Investment Holdings, chaired by former Northern Cape premier Manne Dipico, to fulfill the BEE component.
Afrifund has since cried foul, accusing Gunvor and Shell of sidelining it without transparency or due process. The company has confirmed it is considering legal action, claiming it was unfairly cut out of the deal after months of engagement.
“This is not just a contractual matter, but a question of corporate integrity and respect for local empowerment frameworks,” a source close to Afrifund said. “We see this as political maneuvering dressed as business strategy.”
Neither Gunvor nor Shell has publicly commented on the dispute, although sources indicate that legal teams from all parties are now involved. Shell’s South African exit was expected to conclude by mid-2025, but the litigation could delay or potentially scuttle the transaction.
A senior energy analyst told The Africa Logistics that, “This legal battle raises serious questions about how multinational firms interpret and apply BEE requirements. It may trigger broader scrutiny from regulators.”
Bigger Implications for South Africa’s Energy Sector
The outcome of this legal conflict could ripple through South Africa’s investment and regulatory landscape. With BEE policies being a cornerstone of economic transformation, disputes like this may undermine investor confidence if not resolved transparently.
Moreover, the case could become a precedent for future foreign-led transactions involving local empowerment partnerships—especially in strategic sectors such as energy and logistics.
What’s at Stake?
-
Shell’s Exit Timeline: A prolonged court battle could delay Shell’s divestment plans indefinitely.
-
Market Stability: Any disruption could affect fuel distribution, pricing, and jobs tied to Shell’s retail network.
-
Regulatory Intervention: South Africa’s competition authorities and energy regulators may step in to investigate the transaction more deeply.
-
Reputation Risk: All players involved—Shell, Gunvor, and local stakeholders—risk reputational damage if the dispute continues in the public eye.
As the legal wrangling intensifies, stakeholders across South Africa’s energy, legal, and investment circles will be watching closely. Whether Shell can exit cleanly—and equitably—remains to be seen.
Also Read
From Carjackings to Cloud Tech: Zak Calisto’s Billion-Dollar Leap
Intuit Beats Q3 Earnings Expectations, Raises Full-Year Revenue and EPS Guidance