On 12 November 2025, Judge Mangcu-Lockwood handed down her ruling, granting the State and Shell limited permission to appeal against her 13 August decision to set aside the Environmental Authorisation (EA) for offshore drilling in Block 5/6/7 off South Africa’s south-west coast. The case, brought by The Green Connection and Natural Justice, seeks to defend the rights of coastal communities to sustain their ocean-dependent livelihoods, protect their food security and shield them from the deepening impacts of climate change. The appeal will be heard in the Supreme Court of Appeal.

In a landmark victory for civil society and coastal communities, the earlier judgment exposed serious flaws in how the environmental and social risks were evaluated and returned the matter to the Department of Minerals and Petroleum, requiring fresh assessments, additional information, and public participation. While the authorisation was initially granted to TotalEnergies EP South Africa (Teepsa), Total intends to transfer the environmental authorisation to Shell, for Shell to conduct the drilling.

Shell and the State respondents applied for leave to appeal against this judgment. Permission to appeal was granted by Judge Mangcu-Lockwood in relation to two of the five grounds of review – that full lifecycle climate impacts must be considered in exploration applications; and that transboundary impacts must be considered. The State and Shell were not granted leave to appeal in respect of the remaining review grounds, which means that the environmental authorisation decision remains set aside, and the question on appeal will be whether lifecycle climate impacts and transboundary impacts should be considered when a new decision is taken.

The Green Connection’s Community Outreach Coordinator, Neville van Rooy says, “It is disappointing that the judge did not dismiss the application for leave to appeal entirely. However, we believe that limiting the appeal to just the climate change and transboundary impact issues, the Court has effectively confirmed our key victories on public participation, socio-economic impacts, and coastal law compliance as binding High Court precedent. It’s a strong affirmation that environmental justice and community voices must remain central in decision-making. For coastal communities and small-scale fishers, this ruling reinforces that their voices matter.”

He says that it is important to note that the EA remains unlawful and invalid. This confirms that the Shell and/or TotalEnergies must redo the environmental impact assessment, and a new environmental authorisation is required before any drilling activity can be reconsidered.

The Green Connection’s Advocacy Officer, Lisa Makaula says, “We have now entered a defining phase for climate and environmental justice in South Africa. The appeal will test two critical questions: whether exploration and production are legally linked – requiring regulators to account for the full climate footprint, including emissions from any oil or gas eventually burned – and whether authorities must assess the potential harm of an oil spill beyond our borders. These issues go to the heart of our constitutional duty to protect people, the planet, and future generations.”

Natural Justice Programme Manager, Melissa Groenink-Groves says, “We welcomed the judgment in August and continue to hail it a victory for coastal communities. We know that the road to community and climate justice may be long, as oil and gas companies continue to resist their legal and ethical
obligations to conduct comprehensive assessments of their potentially devastating projects. We are confident that the Supreme Court of Appeal will continue to come to the defence of coastal communities to protect our ocean for the people who depend on it.”

For now, however, the ruling represents a decisive affirmation that environmental governance and public participation cannot be treated as procedural afterthoughts in the rush for offshore oil and gas.