At the heart of the case is Pula Graphite, a Tanzania-based mining firm that accuses Motsepe and several Motsepe-linked companies of breaching a confidentiality agreement signed in 2019.
Pula alleges the agreement gave Motsepe’s companies access to sensitive commercial and technical data, which was later used to back a rival graphite project in Tanzania’s Ruangwa region.
The dispute, first filed in 2023, has since turned into a complex cross-border legal battle involving African Rainbow Capital, African Rainbow Minerals, ARCH Sustainable Resources, and Motsepe personally.
While the substantive case is being heard in Tanzania, Motsepe’s companies have been seeking relief in South African courts as the Tanzanian judiciary moves toward setting a trial date within the next two months.
In August 2025, African Rainbow Capital approached the Johannesburg High Court on an ex parte basis, meaning the application was heard without Pula present.
ARC sought permission to serve legal papers through edictal citation, a procedure used when a party claims it cannot locate its opponent.
In December, the firm asked Judge David Sutherland to have the matter designated as a commercial court case and fast-tracked for hearing.
Legal tactics come under scrutiny
Pula argues that these moves are designed to delay and complicate proceedings in Tanzania, where the core of the dispute will be decided.
“The use of an ex parte process, together with unresolved questions around judicial disclosure and perceived conflicts under the Code of Judicial Conduct, has shifted this beyond a contractual fight into a story about process, transparency, and whether the safeguards meant to protect public confidence in the courts are being applied consistently when powerful interests are involved,” the company said.
Motsepe and his companies reject the claims. The billionaire has previously described Pula’s allegations as “baseless and nonsensical,” saying he does not recall ever receiving the company’s confidential information.
As Tanzania prepares to move the case forward, the outcome could have far-reaching implications for how Africa’s mining deals are structured, enforced, and challenged when disputes spill across borders.
