Eskom clarifies status of trading licence litigation and reaffirms commitment to transparent regulatory reform
Monday, 12 January 2026: Eskom wishes to clarify recent public commentary regarding the status of its High Court review application relating to electricity trading licences issued by the National Energy Regulator of South Africa (NERSA), and to address claims that Eskom has acted inconsistently or misleadingly in this matter.
Eskom has been clear and consistent in its public position: it supports the reform of South Africa’s electricity market, welcomes competition, and remains committed and is participating alongside other traders in the NERSA-led process to develop trading rules that enable a fair, transparent and sustainable competitive marketplace. The period for submission of inputs has been announced as the end of January 2026. It is for this reason that Eskom is disappointed that it has been compelled to proceed with the case, given the work underway.
Eskom has no intention of restarting or escalating litigation as a substitute for regulatory reform and is still not actively progressing the application.
However, it is important to clarify the procedural context in which Eskom’s public statements regarding the “staying,” or pausing, of its legal action were made.
When Eskom communicated a stay in proceedings, it was communicating its intention to create space for NERSA to conduct consultations and public hearings on the development of new trading rules. Even if all the parties agree to stay, there is no court order, because there is no provision in law for this. It is rather a pragmatic step to ensure the most optimal outcome for the electricity supply industry.
This intention was communicated publicly and aligned with Eskom’s support for regulatory reform rather than litigation.
Subsequent procedural steps occurred not because Eskom reversed its position, but because Eskom was placed in a position where it was required either to abandon its review application entirely or to participate in procedural processes initiated by trader parties. Specifically, NOA Group Trading (Pty) Ltd declined Eskom’s request that the matter remains stayed and proceeded to convene a case management conference to pave the way to advancing the application, instead of waiting for the NERSA-led process to reach its conclusion. In these circumstances, Eskom had no practical option but to participate in procedural steps to protect its legal position.
Participation in procedural processes under these conditions should not be interpreted as a strategic decision to undermine regulatory reform, nor as evidence of duplicity, or, for that matter, a change in its intention not to actively pursue the litigation. To the extent possible, it still intends to allow the regulatory process to unfold. However, it is constrained to do so due to the circumstances explained.
Eskom did not seek to mislead the public, policymakers or the court. At all times, Eskom’s objective has been to avoid regulatory uncertainty while ensuring that reforms are implemented within a lawful and coherent framework.
“The original grounds for Eskom’s review application remain unchanged. The granting of trading licenses today to new market entrants, such as traders, enables subsidy-contributing customers to evade contributing towards billions of rands in subsidies, which is why new, fair-trading rules are required. Until new trading rules are finalised, all market participants – incumbent and new – are required to operate under the existing regulatory framework to preserve the rule of law, maintain public oversight, and avoid unintended consequences for customers and municipalities. Proceeding with reform without clear and enforceable rules risks creating uncertainty over obligations, subsidies and consumer protection mechanisms,” said Eskom Group Chief Executive, Dan Marokane.
“Eskom supports the introduction of competition on a level playing field. In electricity markets globally, regulated obligations such as cross-subsidies for low-income households and strategic industries are embedded in policy and tariff frameworks. In South Africa’s highly unequal context, reforms must ensure that competition does not result in subsidy-contributing customers exiting the system while regulated entities and municipalities are left to shoulder these obligations alone,” continued Marokane.
Eskom continues to advocate for two key measures to support fair competition and affordability: the redesign of regulated tariffs to ensure cost recovery from all market participants, and the establishment of retailer-of-last-resort obligations to protect customers and system stability.
Eskom recognises the importance of precision and clarity in public communication on legal and regulatory matters and remains committed to transparent engagement with government, NERSA, industry stakeholders and the public. Eskom will continue to participate constructively and in good faith in regulatory processes aimed at strengthening energy security, attracting investment and supporting a just and sustainable transition for South Africa.
ENDS
