Sibanye-Stillwater, the multinational mining and metals giant entangled in a major legal battle with Appian Capital Advisory. This case stems from a deal worth $1.2 billion that was abruptly terminated in January 2022.
The ongoing proceedings, which are being heard in the High Court of England and Wales, revolve around the acquisition of two Brazilian mines: Santa Rita, a nickel mine, and Serrote, a copper mine. Notably, the former is one of the rare nickel sulfide mines that is still operating. It also produces copper, cobalt, and platinum group metals as by-products.
Sibanye’s decision to withdraw from the deal has led to accusations and legal claims for compensation by Appian. As both sides prepare for the next phase of the case in November 2025, the stakes are high, with claims that could exceed $600 million, as reported by MINING.COM
The Massive $1.2B Deal and Its Collapse
Going back in time, in October 2021, Sibanye-Stillwater struck a $1.2 billion deal with Appian to acquire the Santa Rita and Serrote mines. These assets are owned by Atlantic Nickel and Mineração Vale Verde. Appian’s funds were meant to strengthen Sibanye’s stock of critical metals. The latter was looking to shift its focus from platinum and gold to new opportunities.
Notably, Sibanye-Stillwater had robust plans to expand into battery metals like nickel and copper which are the most essential for the fast-growing electric vehicle (EV) market.
However, just three months later, Sibanye-Stillwater terminated the share purchase agreements (SPAs), citing a “geotechnical event” at the Santa Rita mine as the primary reason. The mining company cited the event as significantly impacting future operations and used it to justify backing out of the deal. Appian, however, claimed that the event was minor and did not justify the termination of the agreements, leading to the start of legal proceedings in 2022.
The Legal Battle and Initial Rulings
The first stage of the legal battle began in June 2024 and centered on whether the geotechnical event could be reasonably expected to have a material and adverse impact on Santa Rita’s operations. After a five-week trial, Justice Butcher ruled in October 2024 that Sibanye was not justified in terminating the SPAs.
The press release revealed that, according to the judgment, the geotechnical event at Santa Rita was neither as material nor as adverse as Sibanye claimed, meaning the company had no right to withdraw from the deal based on this event.
However, Sibanye achieved a partial victory in the ruling. The court dismissed Appian’s claim of “wilful misconduct”, with the judge acknowledging that Sibanye’s management genuinely believed they were acting in the company’s best interest. This ruling suggests that while Sibanye’s reasoning was flawed, the company did not act with malicious intent.
Appian’s Compensation Claims and Initiation of the Quantum Trial
Appian is now pursuing compensation for the failed deal. The company initially sought $522 million in damages but has indicated that the total claim could exceed $600 million, including interest and legal costs. These figures represent the difference between the agreed purchase price and the mines’ current market value, alongside expenses incurred during the resale process.
Appian further pressed that Sibanye’s termination caused substantial financial losses, and they aimed to recover the full amount.
The legal battle is far from over, as the case now moves into the second phase—a trial scheduled for November 2025. This trial, known as the Quantum Trial, will determine the exact amount of damages Sibanye will be required to pay, if any. Appian argues that they would have sold the mines to another buyer for a similar price if the deal had not fallen through.
However, Sibanye maintains that Appian received multiple offers for the mines after the deal’s collapse and, therefore, cannot claim that they suffered a significant financial loss.
Sibanye’s position in the Quantum Trial is that Appian failed to mitigate its losses. Under English contract law, a party seeking compensation is required to take reasonable steps to reduce the damages they incur. Sibanye argues that Appian could have, and should have, sold the mines at fair market value soon after the deal was terminated. The company also asserts that Appian’s continuing ownership of the mines may have resulted in profits, which would reduce the overall damages they could claim.
High Stakes for Sibanye-Stillwater, Will Nickel Pay Off?
The legal battle with Appian comes at a difficult time for Sibanye-Stillwater. Leading media agencies reported that CEO Neal Froneman is already grappling with declining prices for platinum group metals, which has put additional pressure on the company’s financial performance.
As Sibanye seeks to diversify its portfolio and reduce its reliance on these traditional metals, the outcome of the trial could have significant implications for the company’s strategic direction.
Sibanye-Stillwater’s expansion into battery metals is a crucial part of its growth strategy. The company has made several moves in recent years to acquire assets in this sector, including its initial attempt to purchase Appian’s Brazilian mines.
However, the collapse of this deal has forced Sibanye to explore other opportunities. Analysts have noted that the prices of nickel, copper, and other battery metals have risen sharply in recent years, making it more challenging to find affordable assets.
Nickel, in particular, is increasingly important for the production of lithium-ion batteries used in electric vehicles. However, miners and market experts predict that the demand for nickel and other critical metals will certainly surge with the EV boom.
This leads to the most inevitable scrutiny- can Sibanye-Stillwater’s ability to secure access to these materials propel its growth in the battery metals market in the future?
Image: Nickel Demand from EV and Other Applications, 2022-2030
Source: IRENA report
Appian vs. Sibanye: The Final Verdict Looms
In the meantime, the Brazilian mines in question continue to operate, with Santa Rita transitioning from open-pit to underground operations. This transition to high-grade nickel can potentially extend the mine’s life by over 20 years. Alternatively, it significantly highlights the ongoing value of these assets and the high stakes involved in this legal battle.
Sources:
