Corporate M&A 2026

Last Updated April 21, 2026

Mauritius

Law and Practice

Authors



Juristconsult Chambers (DLA Piper Africa) is an innovative and leading business law firm in Mauritius, duly registered with the Attorney-General’s office. The law firm was founded by senior counsel Me Marc Hein in 1989, who today is the Chairman of Juristconsult Chambers. Since then, Juristconsult Chambers has assisted local and international companies, high net worth individuals and financial institutions, including banks, funds and trusts, governments and public bodies that have entrusted their legal challenges to the firm. The legal team consists of 15 qualified law practitioners who practise at the Bar of Mauritius and who are well versed in the Mauritius legal and business environment. Juristconsult Chambers provides legal services mainly in the following areas: corporate and commercial, banking and finance, investment funds, employment, IP and data protection, fintech, trusts, and litigation and arbitration. Juristconsult Chambers has been very active in M&A transactions and has advised multinational companies, high net worth individuals, banks and domestic conglomerates on such transactions.

There has been a marked increase in the M&A market compared to 12 months ago, driven primarily by a sharp rise in high-value, cross-border transactions alongside a steadier level of domestic activity.

Digitalisation, fintech and ESG have emerged as the defining trends in Mauritius in the past 12 months. Prominent attention has also been directed towards fiscal transparency and wealth planning.

The industries that experienced increased M&A activity in 2025 include financial services, real estate, mining, fintech and renewable energy.

Financial Services

This sector has remained quite active. The insurance sector, which forms part of the financial services industry, has seen significant M&A.

Real Estate

This sector saw significant activity driven by large-scale property and diplomatic housing mergers, reflecting continued investor interest in real estate assets and specialised accommodation portfolios.

Mining

Mining transactions remained active, with notable stake sales involving Mauritius‑linked holding structures, supported by strong demand for critical minerals and cross‑border consolidation.

Fintech

This sector continues to attract investment, with Mauritius‑based structures frequently used for digital, sustainability‑focused and tech‑enabled platforms operating across the region.

Renewable Energy

Activity in this sector remains steady, supported by debt and equity funding into renewable energy, utilities and development platforms structured through Mauritius.

A company in Mauritius may be acquired through several methods, including:

  • agreement between private parties, involving either a share purchase or an asset purchase;
  • statutory amalgamations pursuant to the Companies Act 2001, where two companies merge and either one survives or a completely new company is created;
  • court-ordered amalgamations, where the Supreme Court approves the merger of two or more companies;
  • schemes of arrangement, which must be sanctioned by the Supreme Court of Mauritius;
  • acquisition of shares on the stock exchange; and
  • takeover offers under the Securities (Takeover) Rules 2010 (the “Takeover Rules”), allowing an offeror to obtain effective control of a “reporting issuer” (excluding non-listed Global Business Licence companies).

The primary regulators for M&A activity are as follows.

  • The Registrar of Companies (ROC) in relation to the provisions of the Companies Act 2001, as amended.
  • The Financial Services Commission (FSC) and the Stock Exchange of Mauritius, pursuant to the provisions of:
    1. the Securities Act 2005, as amended;
    2. the Securities (Public Offer) Rules 2007, as amended;
    3. the Securities (Preferential Offer) Rules 2017, as amended;
    4. the Takeover Rules, as amended;
    5. the Securities (Purchase of Own Shares) Rules 2008, as amended; and
    6. the Financial Services Act 2007, as amended, where the target company holds a specialised licence.
  • The Competition Commission, as regards competition law matters under the Competition Act 2007, as amended.

Mauritius maintains an open investment regime with no overarching restrictions on foreign investment. However, regulatory approvals are required in specific situations, particularly:

  • property ownership by non-citizens, which is only permitted through approved schemes, administered by the Economic Development Board;
  • notification to the FSC whenever a person becomes the holder of 20% or more of a company’s shares or its voting powers, whether directly or indirectly; and
  • notification to the ROC whenever there is a change of shareholding by way of transfer of shares or issue of shares.

Regulatory Framework

The Competition Act 2007, as amended regulates business combinations. The Competition Commission of Mauritius (CCM) is responsible for reviewing M&A to ensure that they do not substantially lessen competition by adopting anti-competitive conduct.

Review of Merger Situation by the CCM

Only those mergers shall be subject to review by the CCM where:

  • all the parties together, after a merger, shall acquire or supply more than 30% or more of goods and services (which they were providing before) on a relevant market; or
  • one of the parties to the merger alone supplies or acquires prior to the merger 30% or more of goods or services on a relevant market; and
  • the CCM has reasonable grounds to believe that the merger situation has resulted in or is likely to result in a substantial lessening of competition within any market for goods and services.

Remedies in Merger Control

The CCM may provide structural or behavioural remedies both in prospective and completed mergers to prevent or remedy a substantial lessening of competition, including ordering divestitures, halting implementation, imposing conduct requirements, taking urgent interim measures, and enforcing compliance through the Judge in Chambers, where applicable.

Merger Notification to the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA)

Mauritius also remains subject to the COMESA Competition Regulations for cross‑border mergers due to its status as a COMESA member state, which may eventually also include notification of notifiable mergers to the COMESA Competition and Consumer Commission prior to implementation.

The Workers Rights Act 2019, as amended and the Employment Relations Act 2008 are the two main labour laws in Mauritius. In the context of M&A, where an acquisition results in workforce reduction, the employer will have to follow the statutory reduction of workforce procedure, including negotiation with trade unions and in cases that are escalated to the Redundancy Board. Where there is no reduction of workforce after the M&A, the new employer must ensure that the conditions of work under the new contract are not less favourable than under the previous contract.

Mauritius does not maintain any national security review of acquisitions. However, as previously highlighted, the FSC and the ROC need to be notified in instances where there is a change in shareholding.

There have been no significant M&A-related court decisions or legal developments for the past three years.

There have been no recent significant changes to takeover law in Mauritius, and the law is not under review either.

Under Mauritian takeover practice, it is not mandatory but still relatively common for a bidder to build a stake in the target before launching a takeover offer. This practice is recognised in the Mauritian public M&A framework, particularly under the Securities Act 2005 and related FSC rules on takeovers and mergers. The principal stakebuilding strategies include:

  • market purchases, where the bidder gradually purchases shares on the stock exchange before announcing a takeover offer;
  • block purchases from existing shareholders, where the bidder negotiates privately with a significant shareholder of the target to acquire a large block of shares;
  • subscription for newly issued shares, where the bidder may acquire a stake through subscription to newly issued shares in the target; and
  • use of derivatives or other securities.

In a public M&A context, disclosure obligations arise where the value of an acquisition or disposal reaches 10% of the net asset value of the reporting issuer, as required under the continuous disclosure obligations of the Securities Act 2007, as amended.

Timely public disclosure is also required when there is a material change in relation to the issuer, including:

  • any public issuance of securities;
  • a change in the beneficial ownership affecting control;
  • a change in name;
  • mergers, amalgamations, or reorganisations of capital;
  • takeover offers made by or on behalf of the issuer;
  • any significant acquisition or disposal of assets or joint venture interests;
  • changes to capital structure such as splits, consolidations, redemptions or exchanges; and
  • any additional changes required to be disclosed under rules issued by the FSC.

Where the entity is licensed by the FSC, prior approval is required before any change in shareholding becomes effective if the interest exceeds 5% or results in a change in control. Similarly, entities licensed by the Bank of Mauritius require prior approval for changes in equity ownership.

A company can provide in its constitution a higher reporting threshold than provided by law; however, it is not possible to provide a lower threshold. One hurdle is that if the mandatory offer threshold is reached it must make a mandatory offer to all remaining shareholders.

In the context of a takeover, the securities of a listed target generally continue to trade. However, the offeror and its concert parties are prohibited from dealing in the target’s securities during the offer period.

In addition, any person with confidential or insider information concerning a potential offer must refrain from dealing until the offer is publicly announced or discussions end. A person in possession of insider information is likewise barred from dealing in the securities of either the bidder or the target, failing which they may incur liability for insider dealing under the Securities Act 2005, as amended.

“Securities” is defined under the Securities Act 2005 as including “derivatives”. Dealing in derivatives is therefore allowed in Mauritius.

Since derivatives are included within the meaning of securities under the Securities Act 2005, the general disclosure and reporting requirements that apply to securities transactions also apply to derivative dealings, which includes disclosure of material changes and reporting obligations.

In a public takeover, the offer document must clearly set out the offeror’s intentions regarding:

  • whether the target’s business will be maintained;
  • any significant changes proposed to the business model or assets;
  • long‑term rationale for the acquisition;
  • the intended future of the workforce; and
  • the purpose of the acquisition and strategic plans following completion.

Where the target is a regulated entity, additional details may be required by the relevant regulator. For instance, the FSC may request further information when considering whether to grant approval for a change in shareholding.

Private M&A (Non-Listed or Private Company)

There is no statutory requirement to publicly disclose the deal, except where other laws impose notification obligations.

  • If the target operates under a regulatory licence, disclosure may be required as part of the approval process. For instance, licensees supervised by the FSC must obtain prior consent for certain ownership changes, which necessarily entails informing the regulator.
  • Disclosure may also be triggered by contractual provisions, such as change‑of‑control clauses or mandatory consent requirements found in financing documents, commercial agreements or joint venture arrangements.
  • For public M&A, a formal announcement is required once the offeror has reached a firm intention to launch a takeover offer.

Public M&A

The board must make a public announcement when a firm intention to make an offer is received. Where there is undue share price movement linked to the transaction, disclosure may also be required.

A firm intention announcement must include:

  • the terms of the proposed offer;
  • the identity of the offeror;
  • confirmation that the offeror has adequate financial resources (Rule 9);
  • details of securities already held by the offeror or persons acting in concert;
  • material undisclosed agreements with the target; and
  • the conditions to which the offer is subject.

Where a transaction meets the thresholds for a “substantial” or “disclosable” transaction under the Stock Exchange of Mauritius Listing Rules, the listed issuer must notify the Stock Exchange of Mauritius and issue a circular containing prescribed information (eg, details of the transaction, consideration, methodology used to determine valuation, and timing). Such transaction also warrants a public announcement.

In practice, the market follows the statutory and regulatory requirements described previously (see 5.1 Requirement to Disclose a Deal).

Mauritian law does not oblige a target to grant due diligence access to a potential buyer. The extent of diligence is a matter of negotiation. In both public and private transactions, the scope typically covers:

  • incorporation and registration records;
  • a review of the company’s constitution and other constitutional records;
  • licensing and regulatory matters;
  • shareholding and directorship;
  • existing or ongoing litigation and judgments, including insolvency proceedings;
  • environmental compliance;
  • intellectual property and data protection;
  • real estate holdings;
  • taxation;
  • indebtedness and banking arrangements; and
  • key commercial contracts.

The scope varies depending on whether the deal is asset-based, a share acquisition or a merger.

Exclusivity undertakings are usually addressed early in the process, often via a term sheet, letter of intent or non-disclosure agreement. They provide the bidder comfort that the seller will not solicit or negotiate with other buyers during the agreed period. Standstill clauses, which restrict the bidder from acquiring additional shares or influencing the company outside the negotiation process, are less frequently used but may be adopted to safeguard the target during diligence and multi-bidder situations.

In public takeovers, the terms of the offer are not normally captured in a definitive agreement between the bidder and the target. Instead, the offer terms are set out in the firm intention announcement and the offer document, which must comply with the Takeover Rules.

In private M&A, parties typically sign a binding share purchase agreement or asset purchase agreement following due diligence and negotiation, which incorporates warranties, indemnities, covenants and closing conditions.

Nothing prevents parties from entering into a binding agreement earlier in the process if they mutually agree.

There is no statutory deadline for completing a private M&A transaction. The timeline will depend on (among other things) the transaction structure, complexity and the progress of negotiations between the parties.

For public M&A involving a reporting issuer, the timetable is prescribed by the Takeover Rules. Once an offeror issues a firm intention to make an offer, the process generally proceeds as follows:

  • the target company makes an immediate public announcement (in two daily newspapers) upon receipt of the firm intention;
  • the offeror files the offer document with the FSC and the relevant securities exchange;
  • within 14 days of filing, the offeror sends the offer document to shareholders and notifies the target’s board in writing;
  • the target issues its reply circular within 21 days of the offer document being sent to shareholders; and
  • the offer must remain open for not less than 35 days and not more than 60 days from communication to shareholders.

The timetable may be extended if the offer terms change or where court proceedings/interim relief affect the process.

A mandatory offer is triggered where:

  • a person (alone or with persons acting in concert) holds more than 30% of the voting rights in a company and then acquires, or agrees to acquire, additional voting shares in that company;
  • that person (alone or acting in concert) acquires effective control of a company; or
  • following a dealing in a company’s securities, that person (alone or acting in concert) acquires the right to exercise or control the exercise of more than 50% of the voting rights in the company.

Once the mandatory offer obligation is triggered, the acquirer must:

  • make a mandatory offer to all remaining shareholders;
  • publicly announce the mandatory offer; and
  • notify the FSC and the relevant securities exchange of the announcement.

The FSC may waive the mandatory offer requirement:

  • in the context of a restructuring resulting in a change of control of the offeree;
  • where the FSC determines that a mandatory offer would be unfair or not in the interests of the market; or
  • in any other case as the FSC may deem fit.

Mauritian law allows both cash and non‑cash consideration for M&A transactions.

In private M&A, valuation mechanisms such as deferred payments or post‑completion adjustments are commonly used to reconcile valuation differences.

In public M&A, the offeror must:

  • confirm in the offer document that it has sufficient financial resources to satisfy cash consideration; and
  • demonstrate that adequate arrangements are in place to deliver non‑cash consideration.

The board of the target will appoint an independent adviser to opine on whether the consideration is fair and reasonable to shareholders.

The common tools for bridging valuation gaps are earn-outs, deferred consideration, equity rollovers and completion accounts adjustments.

Conditions attached to a takeover are generally at the discretion of the offeror, provided they are included in the firm intention announcement.

Common conditions include:

  • approval by a specified minimum percentage of shareholders;
  • approval from relevant regulatory authorities;
  • clearance under applicable antitrust regulations;
  • receipt of required consents in respect of material contracts; and
  • the absence of any material adverse change during a specified period.

The offeror must disclose all such conditions in the firm intention notice and offer document.

A voluntary takeover offer for all voting shares may be made subject to the condition that the offeror receives sufficient acceptances as to result in control of more than 50% of the voting rights.

In private M&A, the parties may contractually agree on conditions relating to financing, including “financing-out” clauses.

In public M&A, the Takeover Rules prohibit conditionality based on financing availability. The offeror must certify:

  • the availability of sufficient financial resources for a cash offer; and
  • that reasonable arrangements exist to fulfil non‑cash obligations.

In private M&A, the parties are free to negotiate deal protection mechanisms such as exclusivity periods, break‑up fees, non‑solicitation commitments or matching rights.

In public M&A, once a firm intention has been communicated or is imminent, the board of the target must not take actions that might frustrate the offer or prevent shareholders from deciding on its merits.

There have been no changes to the regulatory environment that have impacted the length of interim periods.

If the target company is listed, the bidder may refer to the National Code on Corporate Governance.

For non-listed companies, there will normally be a shareholders’ agreement to govern the relationship among the shareholders, and a constitution. The bidder may negotiate additional governance rights to protect its investment and influence key decisions. Typically, these are pre-emption rights, transfer restrictions and exit rights, veto rights, board representation and dividend policy protections.       

Shareholders may vote in person or by appointing a proxy. A proxy for a shareholder may attend and be heard at a meeting of shareholders as though the proxy were a shareholder.

Where an offeror acquires or agrees to acquire at least 90% of the voting shares of the target, it may give notice to acquire the remaining shares. Dissenting shareholders may also require the offeror to acquire their shares on the same terms.

In public M&A, an offer cannot be withdrawn without the prior approval of the FSC. Parties may still enter into acceptance agreements or other commitments with key shareholders to provide deal certainty, provided they do not restrict minority shareholders or undermine the principles of equal treatment.

For privately negotiated deals, any communication about the transaction is typically left to the parties involved.

For a regional bid involving Mauritius and other COMESA member states, in line with the proposed amendments to the COMESA Merger Regulations, the transaction may require prior approval from the COMESA Competition and Consumer Commission if it qualifies as a “notifiable merger”, before it can be implemented.

In other cases, for public M&A transactions, the press, the websites of the relevant companies and the website of the Stock Exchange of Mauritius may publish the announcements.

For transactions involving a public company, disclosure obligations arise primarily under the Listing Rules of the Stock Exchange of Mauritius and the Securities Act 2005, together with the Takeover Rules where applicable. Listed issuers are required to promptly disclose any price-sensitive information, including material acquisitions, disposals, mergers or takeover transactions, and to issue shareholder circulars where approval is required. Announcements are typically disseminated through the Stock Exchange of Mauritius, published in the press where mandated, and made available on the company’s website in accordance with applicable regulatory requirements.

For private companies, the ROC must be notified. The FSC must also be notified of the change in shareholding.

The Takeover Rules require bidders to disclose adequate financial information, including audited financial statements for the last three years and, where relevant, pro forma information, to demonstrate their ability to complete the offer. Financial statements are prepared in accordance with the following international accounting standards:

  • the International Accounting Standards Committee;
  • International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) issued by the International Accounting Standards Board; and
  • standards issued by the Accounting and Auditing Organisation for Islamic Financial Institutions, where applicable.

For private M&A transactions, although the documents remain confidential between the parties, the regulators may require that the transaction documents be disclosed to them confidentially to obtain certain approvals. For takeover offers, the merger documents must be submitted to the Stock Exchange of Mauritius for review. Public announcements must also be made to the market. The FSC may also require that the documents be disclosed to shareholders.

Directors’ primary duties are owed to the company and not to the shareholders. The directors must:

  • exercise their powers in accordance with the Companies Act and within the limits and subject to the conditions and restrictions established in the company’s constitution;
  • exercise the degree of care, diligence and skill;
  • not make use of or disclose any confidential information received by them on behalf of the company as directors;
  • not compete with or become a director or officer of a competing company;
  • disclose any interest where directors are interested in a transaction to which the company is a party; and
  • act honestly, in good faith and in the company’s best interest. 

Directors must also afford equal and fair treatment to shareholders of the same class in takeover offers.

It is not customary to establish special or ad hoc committees in business combinations.

Mauritian courts are generally reluctant to substitute their own commercial judgement for that of the board. They will usually assess directors’ conduct by reference to their fiduciary duties under the Companies Act 2001, and will intervene only where directors have breached their fiduciary duties.

Legal, employment, data protection, financial, tax, governance and risk advice are commonly given to directors.

There have been cases in Mauritius involving conflicts of interest of directors, managers and shareholders.

There are no regulatory constraints as regards hostile tender offers.

Under the Takeover Rules, once a takeover offer is made or expected, the board cannot take actions that could frustrate the offer without shareholder approval. Directors of the target company are generally prohibited from implementing defensive measures that could materially impede a bona fide takeover bid unless such actions are approved by shareholders in general meetings. Actions that may be considered frustrating are the issuance of new shares, selling or acquiring assets, or entering into material contracts outside the ordinary course of business.

Such measures will depend on the company’s constitution. In general, defensive measures are not allowed once an offer involving a reporting issuer has been made or is about to be made.

The primary duties owed to the company and shareholders prevail – notably, the duty to act in good faith and in the best interests of the company, the duty to avoid conflicts of interest and the duty to treat shareholders fairly and equally under similar circumstances.

In takeover situations, the board cannot independently turn down an offer. Instead, the board must appoint an independent adviser, consider the adviser’s report and make a good‑faith recommendation to shareholders.

Litigation is not common in M&A deals in Mauritius; instead, most disputes are resolved through mediation and arbitration.

Notwithstanding that litigation is relatively uncommon, it may arise at any stage of the deal and even after the deal has closed.

To date, there is no record of litigation arising from broken-deal disputes.

Shareholder activism is not an important force in Mauritius. It remains relatively limited and there is scarce data on its prevalence.

Shareholder activism around M&A, spin-offs or major divestitures is uncommon in Mauritius.

Although shareholders have rights to challenge announced transactions, activist interference is uncommon in Mauritius, reflecting concentrated ownership and a relatively small market.

Juristconsult Chambers (DLA Piper Africa)

Level 12
NeXTeracom Tower II
Ebene 72201
Mauritius

+230 465 0020

+230 465 0021

www.juristconsult.com
Author Business Card

Trends and Developments


Authors



Eversheds Sutherland (Mauritius) has a corporate and commercial department known for its breadth of transactional services, ranging from mergers and acquisitions to reorganisations, fund structures, corporate finance and the establishment of new business ventures. The tax services complement the firm’s domestic and cross border commercial transactions. Further, the department is known for its industry sector expertise in securities and collective investment schemes, and it acts for many multinational funds and private equity houses.

A Surge in Deal Activity

Between 2025 and early 2026, Mauritius has witnessed a noticeable shift in its corporate mergers and acquisitions (M&A) landscape. Described as a gateway for foreign investment into Africa, Mauritius is now experiencing M&A dynamics shaped by global economic trends, regulatory reform in competition law and environmental, social and governance sectors, tax treaty implications and private equity influx. M&A transactions in Mauritius are best understood as a dual market: a relatively small domestic corporate control market (often implemented through schemes of arrangement, takeovers of listed entities and sector‑regulated transfers) alongside cross‑border M&A activity routed through Mauritius’ international financial centre ecosystem.

Several developments have marked this period as a transformative phase with emerging impacts from tax regimes, technological change and cross-border regulatory complexity. This article considers the latest developments and trends shaping corporate M&A in Mauritius, drawing on notable and sizeable deals completed in 2025, regulatory reforms and initiatives, and market directions for the future.

Deal Volume and Foreign Investment Gains

One of the most notable developments in 2025 saw Mauritius overtake traditional and stronghold African jurisdictions, known for their attractiveness as foreign investment hubs (ie, Nigeria), in private equity deal value. According to DealMakers Africa, Mauritius recorded a deal value of USD1.25 billion, a 311.3% year-on-year jump from USD38.9 million in 2024. This was Mauritius’ highest deal value in the last three years, with two notable deals having the largest financial impact. Several transactions have contributed to an increase in M&A in Mauritius, including the following:

  • merger of Diplomatic Holdings Africa, Verdant Ventures and Verdant Property Holdings’ diplomatic housing businesses into a single entity, involving 24,742,277 Grit Real Estate shares and valued at USD839 million;
  • Tremont Master disposed of 718,990,967 shares (a 56% stake) in Alphamin Resources to Alpha Mining (International Resource Holdings) in a USD367 million deal;
  • acquisition of a 100% stake in Sterling Bank, Bahamas by Induslnd International Holdings Ltd (Mauritius);
  • acquisition of shares in African Rainbow Capital Investments Ltd by African Rainbow Capital and Ubuntu-Botho Investments – a deal valued at over USD300 million;
  • acquisition of HSBC’s domestic Wealth and Personal Banking and Business Banking divisions by Absa Bank (Mauritius Limited);
  • acquisition of a majority stake of 76% in AfrAsia Bank Limited (the fourth-largest commercial bank in Mauritius) by Access Bank UK Limited, a 100% subsidiary of Access Bank Plc; and
  • corporate reorganisation and scheme of arrangement and restructure involving ENL Limited and Roger and Company Limited, resulting in the emergence of new listed entities.

While the S&P Global noted a significant downturn in deal value in Southern Africa in the first eight months of 2025 compared with the same period in 2024, Mauritius accounted for one of the highest private equity deal values in Southern Africa, which suggests resilience within the jurisdiction despite a regional slowdown. Furthermore, even though Mauritius attracted relatively few deals as compared to its neighbouring jurisdictions and across the African continent, its concentration in high-value activity suggests investor confidence in select large deals that continue to flow through Mauritius.

A few key sectors that are driving this surge in deal value, growth and investment in Mauritius are fintech, renewable energy, real estate and healthcare. The economic benefits of these deals centre around job creation, sector growth, tax revenue and local supply chains. Key implications of the surge include:

  • growing attractiveness to global investors, particularly in the private equity sphere where larger institutional investors appear confident in deploying significant capital through Mauritian vehicles;
  • stabilisation of Mauritius’ role as an investment gateway into Africa; and
  • enhanced confidence in Mauritius’ legal and regulatory framework and financial services offerings.

These recent developments not only highlight how Mauritius continues to provide a strong and efficient investment environment, but also reflect a shift in how global investors perceive risk – and particularly in which jurisdictions risk exists – along with the types of returns they expect to receive in emerging markets.

Emerging Deal Themes

There are three notable themes underlying M&A transactions in Mauritius:

  • change-of-control transactions are among the most visible, as they trigger regulatory and bank approvals and may necessitate public disclosure and communication, particularly as they relate to listed companies;
  • schemes of arrangement and large group reorganisations are undertaken to separate asset clusters, align liabilities and reset governance structures around diversified holdings; and
  • merger control and reviews are especially relevant to energy and fuels where transactions have been completed outside of Mauritius, but which may trigger review by the Mauritius competition authorities if there is a connection to the Mauritian market.

Legal Developments: Competition Law Reform in Mauritius

From a broader perspective, the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) is an economic organisation founded on the idea that shared growth and prosperity can be achieved through economic integration. Created in December 1994, COMESA brings together 21 African member states, including Mauritius, to form a large and competitive regional market. It aims to strengthen industrial development and promote more co-ordinated monetary, banking and financial frameworks across its members. Its core objectives include advancing trade liberalisation, lowering tariff and non-tariff barriers, and improving regional infrastructure to facilitate smoother cross-border commerce.

On 4 December 2025, the COMESA Council of Ministers voted to adopt the new COMESA Competition and Consumer Protection Regulations 2025 (the “2025 Regulations”). These new regulations effectively repealed and replaced the COMESA Competition Regulations 2004. Key developments and changes to the 2025 Regulations include the following:

  • a suspensory merger control regime, with thresholds and timelines for notification;
  • the authority to conduct market inquiries; and
  • an increase in merger filing fees and caps.

The shift from a non-suspensory to a suspensory regime requires that a notifiable merger (as defined in the 2025 Regulations) must be notified to the COMESA Competition and Consumer Commission (the “Commission”) prior to its implementation. The 2025 Regulations go one step further by stating that such merger may not proceed without the Commission’s approval or derogation, and the parties may be subject to an administrative penalty for failure to notify the Commission.

The COMESA Competition and Consumer Protection Rules 2025 (the “2025 Rules”) provide that a merger is notifiable under three circumstances:

  • the combined annual turnover or combined value of assets, whichever is higher, in the common market of all parties to a merger equals or exceeds USD60 million;
  • the annual turnover or value of assets, whichever is higher, in the common market of each of at least two of the parties to a merger equals or exceeds USD10 million, unless each of the parties to a merger achieves at least two-thirds of its aggregate turnover or assets in the common market within one and the same member state; and
  • a merger in the digital market shall be notifiable if it meets the transaction value of USD250 million.

In terms of fees, the notification of a merger requires a fee equivalent to 0.1% of the combined annual turnover or combined value of assets in the Common Market (as defined in the 2025 Rules) of the parties to a merger, whichever is higher, provided that the fee does not exceed USD300,000. On the other hand, a notification of a merger in the digital market requires a fee equivalent to 0.05% fee of the transaction value, provided that the fee does not exceed USD300,000.

The 2025 Regulations authorise the Commission to conduct market inquiries where it considers it necessary or desirable for the purpose of carrying out its functions. The Commission may request a person to submit relevant information to conduct its inquiry. Failure to comply with this request may result in fines, as provided for under the regulations. Based on the findings of a market inquiry, the Commission may, inter alia:

  • initiate an investigation;
  • enter into agreements with undertakings to implement necessary remedies aimed at addressing the Commission’s concerns;
  • make policy recommendations; or
  • conduct advocacy.

In response to these changes, Mauritius has recently announced that it intends to reform its current competition legislation by creating a new competition law legal framework to align with local and international developments. This new direction could offer a level of comfort and confidence to companies engaging in M&A transactions by providing clearer legislation surrounding the nuances of competition law, merger requirements and notification thresholds. In turn, companies must carefully assess their regulatory requirements to avoid undue delays or unenforceable transactions.

Regulatory Developments: Disclosure and Reporting Guidelines for Environment, Social and Governance Funds (ESG) in Mauritius and Its Impact on Investors

Another impactful regulatory development, alongside competition law reform, is the issuance of disclosure and reporting obligations of ESG funds that are authorised or registered in Mauritius (the “Guidelines”) by the Financial Services Commission in Mauritius (FSC). The Guidelines apply to collective investment schemes, closed-end funds (including sub-funds of variable capital companies) and umbrella funds/cells of a protected cell company, which adopt ESG factors as their key investment focus and strategy (ESG schemes). Ultimately, the Guidelines are geared towards safeguarding investor protection and enhancing confidence in sustainable investment products, along with bolstering Mauritius’ reputation as a credible jurisdiction for sustainable finance.

An example of such increased regulatory scrutiny is the offering document of an ESG scheme, which must disclose the following:

  • investment objective – clear description of the ESG focus (eg, climate change and carbon emissions, sustainability, gender and diversity) and the relevant ESG criteria, methodologies or metrics used to evaluate investments;
  • investment strategy – clear description of the investment strategy used to achieve the ESG goal, including how ESG factors are integrated into the investment decision-making process and portfolio management;
  • asset allocation – disclosure of the proportion of the ESG scheme’s net asset value that is allocated to ESG-compliant investments and the management of non-ESG assets;
  • benchmark – identification of ESG-specific benchmarks used for performance measurement and their relevance to the ESG scheme’s strategy; and
  • risks – description of risks associated with the ESG focus and investment strategy.

The Guidelines substantially elevate disclosure and reporting requirements for ESG-compliant funds and mandate more stringent and in-depth due diligence processes in M&A transactions where acquisitions may involve shareholding stakes or portfolio companies held by ESG schemes. Since the Guidelines apply to ESG schemes that are continued from foreign jurisdictions and cross the border into Mauritius, any pre-completion requirements in relation to a domiciliation or restructuring could involve satisfying the new ESG regulatory conditions. In conclusion, for corporate M&A in Mauritius, this means intensive ESG-focused due diligence, greater contractual protection mechanisms and increased regulatory considerations in cross-border transactions.

Tiger Global and the India-Mauritius Tax Treaty

In January 2026, the Supreme Court of India issued a landmark ruling on capital gains tax exemptions in The Authority for Advance Rulings (Income Tax) & Others v Tiger Global International II Holdings & Others. The case revolved around a dispute between the Indian tax authorities and the Mauritius entities of the Tiger Global Group in relation to the sale of shares held by the Tiger Global Group in Flipkart Pvt Ltd, a Singapore entity, in 2018.

In its judgment, the Supreme Court of India ruled that the tax residency certificate held by the Mauritius entities of Tiger Global Group was insufficient to benefit from the double taxation avoidance agreement between Mauritius and India. Such treaty benefits and the grandfathered protection provisions, which provided an exemption on capital gains tax on shares acquired prior to 1 April 2017, were not applicable under the agreement, and ultimately a tax residency certificate on its own is not sufficient proof to claim tax treaty benefits under the agreement – rather, it must be weighed against other substance considerations.

This judgment poses a risk to Indian investors and companies looking to engage in M&A transactions; it casts doubt over the advantages of a tax residency certificate in Mauritius, which offers tax benefits under the India-Mauritius double taxation avoidance agreement. In particular, the ruling may require Indian companies to assess their ability to do business in Mauritius while remaining tax efficient.

Practical Recommendations for Acquirers, Investors and Advisers

The Mauritius M&A landscape is influenced by macroeconomic conditions, particularly interest rates, debt availably, foreign exchange translation and currency movements. These factors affect the discount rates that are used to value companies, how much debt buyers can raise and how financial results translate across currencies. As a result, buyers who earn and borrow in US dollars or euros may have a different risk profile and stronger purchasing power (albeit with foreign exchange volatility risks) relative to those who operate and exchange only in Mauritian rupees (and who may face different financing constraints).

In terms of acquisitions, a buyer should differentiate between a company that operates in Mauritius and a Mauritius company utilised as a holding or investment platform, as these two categories have dissociable commercial and valuation considerations. For example, where the value of the deal emanates from offshore holding platforms, the buyer’s due diligence and valuation will focus on international tax rules (including the OECD Pillar Two and double taxation avoidance agreements), beneficial ownership requirements, and anti-money laundering compliance standards as opposed to the local business’s performance metrics. On the other hand, transaction advisers should place an emphasis on strong disclosure and documentation production as a competitive advantage for their client.

Looking Ahead to 2026 and Beyond

The high-value deals completed in 2025–26 suggest Mauritius has a role as a preferred jurisdiction for structuring and investment in Africa. Strong private equity inflows, COMESA’s new suspensory merger regime and the anticipated changes to the Mauritius competition framework, enhanced ESG disclosure rules, and increased emphasis on regulatory and sector approvals have increased deal complexity while strengthening investor confidence that Mauritius possesses the legislative and regulatory tools and resources to successfully and efficiently enable buyers and sellers to complete their M&A transactions. Looking ahead, Mauritius is well-positioned to continue growing, given the recent momentum in deal activity and continued reforms, and is likely to attract greater volumes of cross-border and local transactional activity.

Eversheds Sutherland (Mauritius)

Edith, Block B 2nd Floor
Edith Cavell Street
Port Louis
11302
Mauritius

+230 211 0550

+230 211 0780

michaelhough@eversheds-sutherland.mu www.eversheds-sutherland.com
Author Business Card

Law and Practice

Authors



Juristconsult Chambers (DLA Piper Africa) is an innovative and leading business law firm in Mauritius, duly registered with the Attorney-General’s office. The law firm was founded by senior counsel Me Marc Hein in 1989, who today is the Chairman of Juristconsult Chambers. Since then, Juristconsult Chambers has assisted local and international companies, high net worth individuals and financial institutions, including banks, funds and trusts, governments and public bodies that have entrusted their legal challenges to the firm. The legal team consists of 15 qualified law practitioners who practise at the Bar of Mauritius and who are well versed in the Mauritius legal and business environment. Juristconsult Chambers provides legal services mainly in the following areas: corporate and commercial, banking and finance, investment funds, employment, IP and data protection, fintech, trusts, and litigation and arbitration. Juristconsult Chambers has been very active in M&A transactions and has advised multinational companies, high net worth individuals, banks and domestic conglomerates on such transactions.

Trends and Developments

Authors



Eversheds Sutherland (Mauritius) has a corporate and commercial department known for its breadth of transactional services, ranging from mergers and acquisitions to reorganisations, fund structures, corporate finance and the establishment of new business ventures. The tax services complement the firm’s domestic and cross border commercial transactions. Further, the department is known for its industry sector expertise in securities and collective investment schemes, and it acts for many multinational funds and private equity houses.

Compare law and practice by selecting locations and topic(s)

{{searchBoxHeader}}

Select Topic(s)

loading ...
{{topic.title}}

Please select at least one chapter and one topic to use the compare functionality.