British billionaire Daniel McGowan has thrusted into the spotlight Michael Miller, CEO of JSE-listed Mantengu Mining, as the primary figure in an unprecedented R250-million defamation lawsuit brought by miner Liberty Coal (Pty) Ltd.
In the case, now before the Johannesburg High Court, McGowan’s Liberty Coal accuses Miller—alongside Mantengu and PR consultant Janine Hills—of masterminding a campaign of damaging allegations that allegedly wreaked havoc on his company’s reputation and business prospects.
According to court papers, Liberty Coal claims Miller and his co-defendants “acted with reckless disregard for the truth… to inflict as much reputational and commercial harm on the plaintiff as possible.” The suit seeks not only staggering monetary damages but also punitive legal costs for what Liberty Coal describes as “oppressive, scandalous, and unjustifiable” conduct.
The proceedings centre on four prominent publications released between November 2023 and March 2024: three media statements and a televised interview. Liberty Coal argues that under Miller’s leadership, Mantengu and its representatives accused the company of manipulation, criminal activity, and unethical market behaviour.
One statement equates Liberty Coal with “the infamous Optimum Coal that has been rebranded Liberty”, referencing the scandal-plagued, Gupta-linked company synonymous with state capture controversies. The same publication alleges Liberty Coal is part of a “syndicate engaged in market manipulation” and using “front companies” to mask illicit trading.
A second document goes further, targeting a Liberty’s director as head of a “syndicate” aiming to derail Mantengu’s pending acquisition of the Blue Ridge Platinum Mine. “SEAM was controlled by Liberty Coal… engaged in covert, obstructive, and unlawful conduct,” the papers allege.
In a third document, according to court records, Mantengu’s public narrative claims “naked shorting” of Mantengu shares and even implicates the Johannesburg Stock Exchange: “The JSE allegedly facilitated or covered up this unlawful transaction… implying illicit regulatory assistance.”
A televised interview further escalated the controversy by linking Liberty Coal to “insider trading” and threats against Mantengu executives. It was alleged that the Liberty director was “working in concert with others to manipulate share prices and damage Mantengu’s prospects,” according to the court filings.
Liberty Coal alleges these public statements were not coincidental but part of a meticulously orchestrated media blitz engineered to maximise commercial and reputational damage. The timing and delivery, the company argues, were designed “in a deliberate and intentionally coordinated… manner to attract widespread publicity,” with Miller’s leadership central to the campaign.
Crucially, Liberty Coal asserts that the resulting media attention and industry chatter were “reasonably foreseeable given the nature and manner of the publications”, suggesting that Miller and Mantengu foresaw and even encouraged the snowballing of damaging media coverage.
The fallout, Liberty Coal says, has been devastating. The court documents describe a steep toll on the company’s credibility and business operations: “The plaintiff’s ability to transact with institutional buyers… has been materially impaired,” listing lost business and a “chilling effect” on commercial partners.
Liberty Coal’s filings express significant concern regarding regulatory implications, specifically citing a loss of credibility with the Financial Sector Conduct Authority and JSE, as well as a public perception that the plaintiff is dishonest, corrupt, and associated with criminality. This, the company claims, has undermined its standing in South Africa’s tightly regulated mining and financial sectors.
Despite what Liberty Coal calls an “immediate and unequivocal denial” of the allegations, no retraction or apology has been issued by Miller, Mantengu, or Hills. “The defendants acted with reckless disregard for the truth… to inflict as much reputational and commercial harm on the plaintiff as possible,” the court papers reiterate, underscoring the request for punitive damages.
South African law sets a high bar for defamation cases, demanding proof that statements were published, wrongful, intentional, and injurious. Liberty Coal’s legal team insists the accusations are defamatory per se—direct claims of criminality, dishonesty, and market manipulation that are “inherently harmful in law.”
Further, the filings argue that Miller, Mantengu, and Hills are jointly responsible for the alleged smear campaign, given its coordinated nature and the likelihood of widespread republication in the media.
The case is poised to challenge the legal limits of reputational protection and public discourse within South Africa’s intensely competitive mining sector. At the time of publication, Miller, Mantengu Mining, and Hills had yet to file their formal responses. This is a developing story.
