22/05/2026
ARC not resting easy with high hurdles to overcome
The on-going P**a USD 195 million suit against Patrice Motsepe’s of African Rainbow Capital has entered the final stage as P**a’s final witness testified on Monday this week in its cross examination of P**a’s witnesses.
The suit at the High Court of Tanzania (Commercial Division) under, Judge Frank Mirindo, ARC pushed on two points that the firm is not party of the agreement signed between P**a and its sister company African Rainbow Minerals.
ARC maintains the two are separate companies that operate independently of each other and . other line of argument is that the suit should be tried in South Africa and not Tanzania. The logic being that the Agreement between P**a and ARM is subject to South Africa law.
The hurdles that ARC has to overcome are high. ARC’s argument is the parties named as defendants in the suit are separate companies that operate independently.
P**a’s claim is that even though they are separate companies, legally; in this case they did not operate independently of each other. ARC invested in Evolution. Evolution owns the competing graphite project.
This investment constituted the breach of the non-compete clause. The evidence that supports P**a’s argument is a filing to the Australian Stock Exchange by ARC’s subsidiary Evolution.
Evolution owns the competing project in Ruangwa. In the filing to the Australian Stock Exchange Evolution indicated that not only does ARC and Motsepe hold a relevant interest in the project competing with P**a’s project in Ruangwa, they also stated that Patrice Motsepe has a controlling interest in all of the entities named in the suit.
The second hurdle that ARC has to overcome is the argument that the suit should be tried in a South African court. The mining project protected by the non-compete clause is P**a’s graphite project in Ruangwa. The company holding the license is P**a Graphite Partners, a Tanzanian company.