Mtn Vs Turkcell: 4.2bn Bribery Lawsuit Heads To Sa's Top Court

This is after the supreme court of appeal on Tuesday upheld "aspects of the legal appeal" brought by Turkcell and after MTN vowed to fight this judgment in the constitutional court.

The allegations against MTN go back to the licensing of MTN Irancell, in which MTN has a 49 stake. Turkell has alleged the licence was awarded irregularly, something MTN has consistently denied. The company was exonerated from wrongdoing by a committee established in 2012 to probe the allegations of impropriety in Iran.

"The appeal was lodged against a high court judgment, in which the high court had dismissed Turkcell's case against MTN Group on the basis that the South African courts did not have jurisdiction. The supreme court of appeal has set aside the judgment and decided that the South African courts do have jurisdiction. The SCA, however, upheld the high court ruling that Iranian law is applicable to key aspects of the dispute."

MTN emphasised that the decision to uphold the appeal "does not relate to the merits of Turkcell's claims or the allegations made against MTN Group, which have not yet been tested in court".

The Hoffman report cleared MTN, Nhleko and Charnley of wrongdoing. Lord Hoffmann found that MTN made no payments to South Africa's then ambassador to Iran, Yusuf Saloojee, and neither Nhleko nor Charnley authorised former MTN Irancell director Chris Kilowan to promise him anything, as Turkcell had alleged. Kilowan's allegations form the basis of Turkcell's claims, but the committee found his evidence to be "unreliable". - 2025 NewsCentral Media