Shell and South African government officials have filed applications for leave to appeal a Western Cape High Court ruling that halted offshore drilling plans in Block 5/6/7 along the country’s southwest coast, setting up another legal battle over environmental protection and energy development.
The original High Court victory came on August 13, 2025, when Judge Mangcu-Lockwood set aside the government’s environmental authorization for offshore drilling in Block 5/6/7, following a legal challenge by The Green Connection and Natural Justice environmental groups.
Both the State, including the Minister and Director General of Mineral Resources and Energy, and Shell have now filed applications seeking permission to challenge the High Court decision before either the Supreme Court of Appeal or a full bench of the High Court.
Shahil Singh, Legal Advisor to The Green Connection, said the appeal applications were disappointing but not unexpected. “We are hopeful that the High Court will uphold its ruling, which was a big win for human rights and climate justice,” he stated.
The court originally set aside the environmental authorizations because of flawed assessments of oil spill effects, coastal laws, climate change and public participation. A key issue involved emergency preparedness plans that were not made available to the public until after environmental approval was granted.
“Without the public having had a meaningful opportunity to interrogate the full, updated Oil Spill and Blowout Contingency Plans, we do not see how this can be granted,” Singh said. “Not making these plans available to the public until after the environmental approval was granted violated people’s right to comment on emergency preparedness.”
The offshore drilling project involves TotalEnergies EP South Africa (Teepsa), which intended to transfer the environmental authorization to Shell. The block is located off the Cape coast, where the companies planned to explore for oil.
Environmental groups argued the authorization process failed to adequately consider risks to marine ecosystems, coastal communities, and small-scale fishers who depend on ocean resources for their livelihoods.
The State and Shell contend the Court misapplied the law in its August ruling. However, The Green Connection and Natural Justice maintain the decision is legally sound and consistent with constitutional and environmental law requirements for precaution, transparency, and public participation.
Notably, the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment has chosen not to appeal, instead filing a Notice to Abide, indicating it will accept whatever decision the courts reach.
The High Court must now decide whether to grant leave to appeal. If refused, the applicants may petition higher courts, but until any appeal is finalized, the August 13, 2025 judgment remains legally binding.
The case highlights ongoing tensions between South Africa’s energy development ambitions and environmental protection concerns. The offshore drilling project was seen as significant for South Africa’s energy sector, but environmental groups raised concerns about potential impacts on marine life and coastal communities.
The Green Connection and Natural Justice have indicated they will oppose the appeal applications, continuing their legal fight to protect what they describe as ocean environment, climate, and community rights.
The legal battle occurs against the backdrop of South Africa’s efforts to balance energy security needs with environmental protection and climate commitments. The outcome could have broader implications for offshore energy development along South Africa’s coastline.
The appeal process could take several months to resolve, during which the original High Court ruling preventing offshore drilling activities in Block 5/6/7 remains in effect.
Environmental lawyer groups have described the case as a test of South Africa’s commitment to due process in environmental authorizations and meaningful public participation in decisions affecting natural resources and coastal communities.
