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:
The primary regulators for M&A activity are as follows.
Mauritius maintains an open investment regime with no overarching restrictions on foreign investment. However, regulatory approvals are required in specific situations, particularly:
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:
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:
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:
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:
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.
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:
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:
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 timetable may be extended if the offer terms change or where court proceedings/interim relief affect the process.
A mandatory offer is triggered where:
Once the mandatory offer obligation is triggered, the acquirer must:
The FSC may waive the mandatory offer requirement:
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:
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:
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:
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:
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:
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.
Level 12
NeXTeracom Tower II
Ebene 72201
Mauritius
+230 465 0020
+230 465 0021
www.juristconsult.com
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:
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:
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:
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:
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:
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:
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:
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.
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