Business Day
BU S I N E S S DAY.CO. Z A
Friday 29 August 2025
Business Law & Tax Review Brewing a cuppa for a good cause SA can turn a daily caffeine habit into a powerful tool for combating climate change and promoting sustainability By TARYNN DAVIES ENS
Caffeine is often considered the fuel that powers the workplace, with coffee being one of the most popular sources. Globally, more than two billion cups of coffee are consumed daily. In SA alone, an estimated three billion cups are enjoyed annually. However, few consider the environmental impact of the coffee industry, especially the significant waste generated throughout its production and consumption. The journey from bean to cup is resourceintensive and wasteful. Substantial waste is produced at every stage, from cultivation and processing to brewing and serving. Most notably, used coffee grounds from cafés and restaurants often end up in landfills, where they decompose and emit methane, a greenhouse gas far more potent than carbon dioxide.
Vicious cycle This creates a vicious cycle: the high demand for coffee leads to increased waste and emissions, which in turn exacerbate climate change. Climate change then threatens coffee production itself, as rising temperatures and shifting rainfall patterns reduce the suitability of traditional coffee-growing regions. Farmers are forced to move crops to higher altitudes or adopt alternative agricultural
techniques, but these are not permanent solutions. SA’s National Environmental Management: Waste Act 59 of 2008 (Nemwa) provides the legislative framework for waste management. The act defines “waste” as any substance discarded, unwanted or surplus, including business waste such as coffee grounds. Importantly, Nemwa places a duty of care on all waste generators, including businesses, to avoid generating waste where possible and to minimise, re-use, recycle or recover waste when it is generated. Section 16 of Nemwa requires businesses to take all reasonable measures to manage waste in a manner that does not endanger health or the environment. Further, the National Norms and Standards for Organic Waste Composting encourages the diversion of organic waste, such as coffee grounds, from landfill through composting, recycling and other forms of beneficiation. Sadly, the costs associated with diversion of organic waste are currently more expensive than conventional disposal to landfills. This regulatory environment supports innovative approaches to waste management, such as converting coffee waste into value-added products. Rather than viewing coffee waste as a liability, it can be transformed into valuable products that contribute to sustainability. Technologies now exist to convert coffee waste into biofuel, biosugar, bio-oil and biosorbents. Each of these products
/123RF— ncikname
offers unique environmental benefits: ● Biofuel — used as a substitute for petrol or diesel, biofuel can power vehicles, generate electricity or provide heating. In the UK, public buses already run on B20, a biofuel derived from recycled coffee grounds. For every litre of coffee oil, five litres of B20 can be produced, resulting in a 15% reduction in carbon emissions compared to conventional diesel. ● Biosugar — this can be used to enhance plant growth by providing energy and essential minerals to the soil. ● Bio-oil — when geologically stored, bio-oil traps carbon dioxide underground, preventing its release into the atmosphere. Alternatively, it can be used as a source of green energy. ● Biosorbents — these materials can remove toxic contaminants from water sources, offering a solution to water pollution. SA’s energy sector is heavily reliant on fossil fuels, making the transition to biofuels both an environmental and economic imperative. In this context, it is important to note the recent draft Climate Change Regulations, which list food and beverage production as a regulated activity. Projects that convert coffee waste into biofuels could therefore assist companies in this sector to offset some of the costs associated with the carbon tax and support the development of mitigation plans.
The Biofuels Industrial Strategy of the Republic of SA sets out the framework for the development and use of biofuels, including licensing and quality standards. Businesses seeking to convert coffee waste into biofuel must comply with these requirements to ensure environmental protection and market acceptance. There is significant potential for South African businesses, especially cafés, restaurants and corporate offices, and beverage companies producing coffee (which generate substantial coffee grounds and beans waste), to partner with biofuel companies and adopt circular economy practices. By diverting coffee waste from landfill and converting it into biofuel and other valueadded products, businesses can reduce their carbon footprint, comply with legal obligations and contribute to a more sustainable future. To safeguard our morning cuppa while protecting the planet, SA should embrace and adopt innovative waste management solutions. By recognising coffee waste as a resource rather than a liability, and by adhering to robust legislative frameworks, the country can turn a daily habit into a powerful tool for combating climate change and promoting sustainability. What it all boils down to is the potential in a cup of coffee. -Reviewed by Carlyn Frittelli Davies, Consultant in ENS’ Natural Resources and Environment department.
Cautionary tales ... when lawsuits become investment assets By STUART PRINGLE
Class action lawsuits are often celebrated in headlines as stories of justice for the vulnerable, or legal mechanisms that allow ordinary consumers to challenge the might of global corporations. But given emerging trends around the world, it is important to ask how many of these lawsuits are actually driven by the same corporate forces they claim to challenge. In north America, much of Europe and elsewhere in the world, courts are waking up to the uncomfortable truth of investors and hedge funds speculatively funding these cases, driven by a profit incentive rather than the pursuit of justice. The result is that the overriding goal is to chase the highest possible payout, at times with vexatious claims. Regulators, especially in the US, are beginning to demand transparency about who funds consumer-driven lawsuits. In SA, class actions are on the rise although many remain behind closed doors outside of the media spotlight. But who is funding these legal
battles, if anyone at all, is shrouded in mystery. The issue of funders driving litigation hit the spotlight in the US over a leaked sex tape in 2016. Wrestler Hulk Hogan, the late Terry Bollea, sued news website Gawker for $100m for publishing the tape. He won the case. Gawker subsequently declared bankruptcy and it emerged, amid fears of a loss of media independence, that venture capitalist and Paypal cofounder Peter Thiel had been bankrolling Hogan’s lawsuit all along. Since then, some states in the US have started demanding transparency over who is funding litigation.
Funders’ disclosure Florida’s 2024 bid to pass the Litigation Investment Safeguards and Transparency Act failed, but it showed growing discomfort with untraceable funding pipelines. The proposed law would have mandated disclosure of funders to all legal parties and sought to limit funders’ influence over cases, stopping them from appointing witnesses, for one. Even better, the act would have prevented investors taking home more in settlements than the plaintiffs.
Other states are further ahead than Florida. Wisconsin was the first, in 2018, to require funding disclosure in all cases to those involved. In total, 37 US states have either passed or proposed legislation to shine a light on this opaque corner of the legal world. Montana and Indiana require funding disclosure. Louisiana, in 2024, prohibited funders having overt influence over a case. In Kansas, in April 2025, a law was passed requiring legal parties to disclose funding to the courts and some information about financing to their opposition. The legislative reform is being driven because the scale of investment is impossible to ignore. Burford Capital, one of the first US financiers of lawsuits, had a legal fund worth $130m in 2009. By 2024, it had deployed about $1.2bn in lawsuits stating on its website that large corporations now see litigation funding as “indispensable”. Litigation financiers manage more than $15bn in assets across the US, according to the newswire Reuters. While the scale of financial awards and litigation funding in the US is not mirrored in SA, there is a dearth of information about if it even
exists and whether it is driving class actions or the surge of medical negligence suits. Without transparency, it’s hard to tell where justice ends and profit seeking begins. There are instances of class actions being used as a shakedown against corporates with lawyers perhaps hoping for a generous settlement if the firm is desperate to avoid litigation and bad publicity. Additionally, third-party litigation has become a global industry and both funders and plaintiff lawyers, working closely together with other intermediaries, are actively looking for the next lucrative market after US and Europe. SA could be next. Perhaps, then, it is time to ask if SA should require the disclosure of funding in class actions, medical negligence lawsuits and civil cases that pursue large payouts. After all, when lawsuits become line items in private investment portfolios, the public and legal profession may wonder who the system is really working for. -Stuart Pringle is a Cape Town-based lawyer whose services range from family mediation and personal injury law to employment contracts and civil defence litigation.