Displaying items by tag: Legal

Here we go! China-based Huaxin Cement delivered a one-two combo this week by first announcing that it had completed its acquisition of Lafarge Africa from Holcim and then revealing plans to amalgamate all of its overseas businesses into a single subsidiary. The first action feeds into the second but it’s a big move for the international ambitions of the company.

Global Cement Weekly has previously covered Huaxin Cement’s deal to buy Holcim’s majority stake in Lafarge Africa for US$1bn. After being announced in December 2024 the transaction was expected to close in 2025 subject to the usual regulatory approvals. However, various impediments emerged. In March 2025 local press reported that the Senate of Nigeria asked the Bureau of Public Procurement to scrutinise the sale on the grounds of national security and economic sovereignty. A Senate Committee on Capital Market then said in May 2025 that it was going to invite Lafarge Africa for questioning to ‘ensure shareholder rights and transparency of foreign dominance in Nigeria's cement industry.’ Local company and Lafarge Africa shareholder Strategic Consultancy then initiated a legal action to try and block the sale on the grounds that it was conducted secretly and without giving local shareholders the option to buy the shares themselves. These are just the issues that have made the local press. There may be more. The transaction officially closed on 29 August 2025 with Huaxin Cement paying around US$774m. Huaxin Cement is now the majority owner of Lafarge Africa with a 83% share.

Huaxin Cement’s decision to create a specific overseas subsidiary makes sense given the growing size of the business. Its stated aim is to fulfil the group’s “long-term strategic goal of building a world-leading multinational building materials company." The acquisition of Lafarge Africa is one big milestone along this path. In the group’s half-year report, also out this week, it said it had an overseas cement grinding capacity of 24.7Mt/yr with operations in 12 countries including Cambodia, Kyrgyzstan, Malawi, Mozambique, Nepal, Oman, South Africa, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Uzbekistan, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

The new company will make and sell cement, technical services, ready-mixed concrete and aggregates. Notably, it will also specialise in the co-processing of alternative fuels. That last one is mostly implicit in any modern cement enterprise these days but as thermal substitution rates rise in developing markets there are likely to be many battles for commodities and market share ahead. It says it wants to create a new overseas subsidiary in order to “further broaden financing channels, open up and integrate resources, and enhance the operational capabilities of Huaxin Cement.” The plans are reportedly at an early stage, but the new subsidiary will remain under the control of Huaxin Cement in China. The focus on finance also seems particularly important, as the company wants to use its new subsidiary to improve its competitiveness and flexibility in overseas capital markets to help it with financing and mergers and acquisitions. To this end, the new company will be listed on an overseas stock exchange. Hong Kong might be the first contender for that ‘overseas’ bourse with its differing economic and legal systems, whilst remaining firmly Chinese.

To finish, let’s compare the contrasting business strategies of Holcim and Huaxin Cement over the last decade. Lafarge and Holcim merged in 2015, later becoming Holcim as it is today. The company divested many of its assets around the world - including Lafarge Africa, diversified into building systems and spun-off its North American division into Amrize. Huaxin Cement became one of the biggest cement companies in the world as the Chinese sector peaked in the 2010s but has also developed into the leading Chinese cement company overseas. That business outside of China has helped Huaxin Cement to make profits in recent years despite the domestic industry declining in the 2020s. Today, many large-scale cement company divestments all over the world are often linked to Huaxin Cement. Its new overseas company, whatever it is called, is likely to become well known across the world.

Kenya: The High Court has opposed the appointment of Bruno Oguda Obodha as the managing director of East African Portland Cement (EAPCC). The court took action following a petition in late December 2024 that argued that the selection process was opaque and not accountable to the public, according to the Nation newspaper. Oguda was chosen for the role by the country’s president William Ruto. However the role of the Public Service Commission in the appointment process has been questioned by the court. The vacancy for managing director post at EAPCC was announced in October 2024.

Typical! We published a cement sector news review for 2024 in the December 2024 issue of Global Cement Magazine and a load of big important events happened afterwards. So, here is a roundup of some of the major stories that have taken place in the last two months of the year.

The TL:DR (too long; didn't read) version of ‘Global Cement News in 2024’ was: focus on the US market by the multinationals; cement joining the emissions trading scheme in China as the world’s largest market stagnates; continued rivalry between UltraTech Cement and Adani Group in India as that sector grows; markets in the Middle East and North Africa adjusting to higher exports; the drawn out divestment of InterCement in Brazil; lots of new plants in Sub-Saharan Africa reflecting demographic trends; and an emphasis on construction and demolition materials in Europe but one on aggregates in North America.

However, from November 2024 onwards… Donald Trump was re-elected as President in the US, Quikrete put in an US$11.5bn deal to buy Summit Materials, the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP29) in Azerbaijan ended in acrimony, Gautam Adani was accused of fraud by a US court and Huaxin Cement said it was buying Holcim’s majority stake in Lafarge Africa for US$1bn. These have all been covered in previous editions of Global Cement Weekly. Check them out for more information. One can tell it’s been a busy tail-end to the year though when a US$600m agreement by Heidelberg Materials North America to buy Giant Cement Holding did not make the top five, admittedly selective, noteworthy news stories of the last two months of 2024. These stories also, roughly, followed the trends highlighted in the ‘Global Cement News in 2024’ article.

To reflect on the Adani story a few weeks later, nothing much seems to have occurred. Yet. The share price of various Adani Group companies fell when the US authorities made the announcement in late November 2024 but they have mostly regained much of their value since then. The consensus by Reuters, this week, was that the US prosecutors have a strong case backed up by documentation but extradition seems unlikely. Adani himself has made public appearances in India since the allegations surfaced. One minor consequence has been that Gautam Adani exited the US$100bn Bloomberg Billionaires Index in 2024. This is likely to have been caused, in part at least, by the allegations from Hindenburg Research in 2023 and the current legal problems from the US bringing down share prices. On the cement side of Adani Group it appears to have been business as usual so far. A large-scale investment in Rajasthan was announced in December 2024 and, this week, plans to merge subsidiaries Sanghi Industries and Penna Cement with Ambuja Cements were disclosed.

Another general trend that we haven’t covered much online have been changes in the Australian market. Last week, Cement Australia, a joint venture between Heidelberg Materials Australia and Holcim Australia, said it was acquiring the cementitious division of the Buckeridge Group of Companies (BGC) for US$800m. This follows CRH’s purchase of a majority stake in AdBri that was approved by the latter’s shareholders over the summer. Around the same time, Seven Group Holdings completed its acquisition of the remaining 28% stake in Boral that it did not already own. For more on the situation in Australia and New Zealand read the article in the January 2025 issue of Global Cement Magazine.

That’s it for 2024. Unless another massive news story in the cement sector gets announced in the next week-and-a-half.

Global Cement Weekly will return on Wednesday 8 January 2025

Many readers will be aware that Gautam Adani was accused of fraud by a US court this week. In a brief statement, Adani Group said that the allegations were “baseless and denied.” The indictment relates to a solar power project, but what does this mean for Adani Group’s cement businesses?

The charges by the US Department of Justice allege, following an investigation, that Gautam Adani, Sagar Adani and Vneet Jaain, executives of India-based renewable-energy company Indian Energy Company, committed “...securities and wire fraud and substantive securities fraud for their roles in a multi-billion-dollar scheme to obtain funds from US investors and global financial institutions on the basis of false and misleading statements.” A number of other individuals have also been accused, along with the two Adanis and Jaain, of participating in a US$250m bribery scheme to Indian government officials connected to a large-scale solar energy project. The indictment related to the period 2020 - 2024 and further alleges on several occasions that “Gautam Adani personally met with an Indian government official to advance the bribery scheme.” The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has also started a connected civil case.

The problem here is that the indictment has rocked the value of Adani Group’s subsidiaries and reduced the credit ratings of some of them. This in turn will make it harder for these companies to raise money in the future for expansion. Various reports in the media said that the group’s companies had lost something in the region of US$30bn as stock prices fell by around 20%. They have since rallied somewhat. And lest we forget, Adani Group has some serious expansion plans. In the cement sector, it is targeting a production capacity of 140Mt/ yr by 2028. Recent transactions include Ambuja Cement’s purchase of Penna Cement for US$1.25bn in August 2024 and a planned acquisition announced in October 2024 of a 47% stake in Orient Cement for US$451m. The group was also linked in the local media to a bid to buy Heidelberg Materials’ India-based business in October 2024.

All of this comes with a price. International credit ratings agency S&P put Adani Ports, Adani Green Energy and Adani Electricity on a downgrade warning. Then, Fitch Ratings and Moody’s followed. Moody’s, for example, downgraded its outlook for seven Adani Group companies to ‘negative’ from ‘stable’ but it affirmed ratings on them. It commented that the allegations “could have a broader credit impact on all rated Adani group issuers” and that they would “likely weaken the Adani group’s access to funding and increase its capital costs.” It added that its actions recognised “...the possibility of broader weaknesses in the governance structure across the rated Adani group entities as well as potential operational disruptions, including on their capital-spending plans, while legal proceedings are going.” The decision by the ratings agencies does not appear to have directly affected Adani Group’s cement companies, Ambuja Cements or ACC, so far. The group may get lucky here given that these companies focus on the domestic market. Thus their credit ratings may remain more buoyant, regardless of what happens next.

As with a number of other global issues at the moment, the outcome of the recent US presidential election may also play into this case. Attorney Ravi Batra told the Press Trust of India that the incoming Trump administration might view the Adani charges as so-called ‘lawfare.’ This is where legal processes are used to target a nation’s economic or other opponents. In addition the current chair of the SEC, Gary Gensler, announced his intention to step down from the role in January 2025. It seems unlikely that the Trump administration might intervene in a legal case involving a foreign company accused defrauding US citizens but the possibility of realpolitik playing a role shouldn’t be totally discounted.

This is the second major international scandal overhanging Adani Group since the disclosures by Hindenburg Research back in early 2023. Those allegations were relatively easy to shrug off given that its accuser was an investment research firm with a reputation for using its findings for short selling shares. Hindenburg Research was not a neutral bystander. This time round, the US judicial system has become involved and the consequences are bigger both reputationally and from any potential legal outcome. In the short term, the credit implications for Adani Group as a whole are becoming apparent. Various companies and countries have stalled or cancelled planned investments. However, the cement business is smaller than the group’s power and transport concerns. It also operates domestically. We’ll have to wait and see what the wider implications for Adani Group are. The first thing to watch for the cement business will be any effect on its expansion plans.

Starlinger revealed this week that it had taken on copycats in China and won. The packaging machine manufacturer said that it had sued a number of China-based machine manufacturers and their customers, packaging producers, based on infringement of several of its patents. An out-of-court settlement was eventually reached with the case going before both a civil court and a Chinese court specialised in intellectual property. Naturally, Austria-based Starlinger did not say what the settlement involved other than stating that the proceedings had been “...settled with strict obligations for the machine manufacturers.”

It’s unclear how directly the case affected the cement sector. Starlinger did say that the case involved a replica of a proprietary sack conversion line for producing woven plastic sacks. Packaging producers, often in Asia, use Starlinger’s conversion lines to manufacture proprietary block bottom valve sacks made of polypropylene tape fabric for the cement and construction industries, although they are also used for other dry bulk goods such as rice, flour or chemical granulates.

Starlinger’s reasons for going public are interesting given that most companies steer well clear of discussing legal matters openly. In the accompanying press statement Harald Neumüller, the chief strategy officer of Starlinger, used the disclosure to promote his products by saying “Only the best are copied, as the saying goes.” He then went on to underline the company’s strengths in research and development. Yet he also admitted that this was “...little consolation if it has economic consequences for innovative machine manufacturers like us.”

Firstly it should be noted that battles over patents and ideas happen everywhere from time to time. Discussing international copyright theft has become politicised because it plays into the geopolitical rivalry between the US, Europe and China. One US-government commissioned estimate in 2017 reckoned that the US economy was losing US$225 - 600bn/yr due to counterfeit goods, pirated software and theft of trade secrets. This report has been criticised but it gives one an idea of the scale of the concern. However, there are also plenty of prognosticators in the western media who have spent the last two decades warning of a hard landing in the Chinese economy that hasn’t happened.

Bringing this discussion back to cement, following the collapse of the real estate market since 2021, cement output has fallen. Data from the National Bureau of Statistics of China shows that output decreased by 11% year-on-year to 1.33Bnt in the nine months from January to September 2024. This appears to be following a similar decline in local real estate investment. The market is still correcting itself and the government is making gradual changes but there has been no apparent cataclysm so far. China-based equipment suppliers don’t appear to have suffered to the same degree due to their foreign orders.

The standard western narrative is that when European or American companies sold their equipment in China from the 1990s onwards they contended with a rocketing economy and lax intellectual property (IP) enforcement. Such an environment reputedly made it easy for some local companies to copy machinery and sell it more cheaply. At the same time China’s industries legitimately surpassed their competitors leading to criticism about how they did it. Publicly available evidence of this behaviour in the cement sector is limited. One of the few includes action by Haver & Boecker, another packaging machine manufacturer, in the late 2010s. However, anecdotally, the view that IP was stolen in China is prevalent in the west whether it is true or false. No doubt readers will have their own experiences and opinions. None of which would be publishable. The issue has been superseded though as China’s cement sector has become the largest in the world by a considerable margin. The biggest manufacturers of cement plants in the world are now Chinese companies too. They either use their own equipment or buy in western kit depending on what the customer wants. They also own a number of their overseas competitors and more potential acquisitions look likely.

All of this is what makes Starlinger’s admission unusual. It has taken a stand and it may have paid off. At the very least the equipment supplier is wringing publicity out of the affair regardless of how big - or small - the settlement may have been. Others may follow.

Bolivia: The Permanent Court of Arbitration has found itself ‘without jurisdiction’ to resolve a claim by Consorcio Cementero del Sur, Grupo de Inversiones Gloria Bolivia, SOBOCE and Yura Inversiones Bolivia against the Bolivian government over the nationalisation of a stake in FANCESA. Local press has reported that Bolivian Attorney General’s Office welcomed the finding as a ‘resolution of the case in favour of the Bolivian state.’

France/Syria: The French Court of Cassation will deliver its decision on the appeal filed in May 2022 by Lafarge, now part of Holcim, in the case relating to its activities in Syria in the 2010s, on 16 January 2024.

The body will rule on the indictments of Lafarge for complicity in crimes against humanity and endangering the lives of its employees in Syria, which were confirmed by the Paris Court of Appeal in 2022, and which the company is still contesting. The group is suspected of having paid in 2013 and 2014, via its Syria-based subsidiary Lafarge Cement Syria several million euros to jihadist groups, including the Islamic State (IS) organisation, and to intermediaries, to maintain the activity of a cement factory in Jalabiya, even as the country plunged into war.

Spain: The Supreme Court of Spain ruled in favour of tax authorities in their pursuit of Cemex España for its accounting of reported losses in the 2006 – 2009 financial years on 21 November 2023. The authorities imposed a Euro456m fine on the company following an audit in July 2011.

Mexico-based Cemex said that is has ‘sources of liquidity’ available to pay the fine, which it now anticipates that it will do before the end of June 2024.

Cemex ‘categorically’ disagrees with the imposition of the penalty. The group maintains that the losses Cemex España declared were not used and since 2012 have not been accounted for in its financial statements.

Kenya: Peter Kahi of PKF Consulting has been appointed as the administrator of Savannah Cement. This follows the resignation of Harveen Gadhoke, according to the Business Daily newspaper. Gadhoke was appointed as the administrator of the company in November 2022 when Absa and KCB attempted to put it into administration due to combined debts of US$66m. Savannah Cement fought back legally against the attempt to manage it externally but a court rejected this in July 2023.

Bangladesh/India: The completion of an upgrade project to Chhatak Cement’s plant has been thrown into doubt due to uncertainty about securing limestone from India. The plant still needs to build a new 17km ropeway conveyor and this has been delayed due to failure to obtain permission on the Indian side of the border, according to the Daily Star newspaper. It is also facing problems procuring limestone in India due to on-going legal proceedings on environmental grounds between exporters in Meghalaya and the government. The Supreme Court of India granted permission for exports in 2022 but the case is still pending. In addition, plans to install a gas line from Sylhet to the plant has not started yet either.

The state-owned cement producer is run by the Bangladesh Chemical Industries Corporation (BCIC). It originally announced in 2016 that it was spending over US$100m to build a new 1500t/day dry production line at the plant to replace an old wet production line. Although the old line originally had a production capacity of 233,000t/yr, it had fallen to around half of this. However, despite the construction of new silos and other equipment at the site, the unit has not been operational since early 2020. The new line was originally planned to start operation in 2020 but this was delayed until 2023. The BCIC has now proposed that completion of the project be extended to mid-2025.