Mozambique’s hidden debt: Privinvest loses its appeal, but recovery is another battle

The record

What ended the appeal

Peters & Peters, the law firm representing Mozambique, said an order dated 6 May 2026 struck out the Privinvest group’s appeal. According to the firm, the companies had not complied with security terms imposed by the Court of Appeal at Mozambique’s request. It said the July 2024 judgment was consequently final against the corporate defendants, which also owed appeal costs. This account of the order comes from Mozambique’s lawyers. [1]

The procedural reason matters. The announcement describes an appeal lost over security requirements, not a fresh trial of every allegation.

The guarantees behind the boats

The underlying case concerned maritime projects financed through state-backed borrowing. In July 2024, the London Commercial Court found that bribes to then finance minister Manuel Chang had secured sovereign guarantees. Its analysis placed the guarantees at the centre of the loss: private transactions left Mozambique answerable for repayments. This was a civil judgment, not a criminal conviction of every person mentioned in the litigation. [2]

The financial remedy also has separate parts. Spotlight on Corruption described an entitlement to just over $825 million, plus an indemnity for an estimated $1.5 billion in future payments to banks and bondholders. Reuters subsequently reported that around $420 million already recovered was to be deducted. [4] Those figures should not be flattened into a single cash payment already received. Nor do they describe the amount paid in bribes. [3]

Privinvest’s objections

Privinvest contested liability and raised objections to Mozambique’s disclosure of documents. It obtained permission to appeal in April 2025. The trial court had addressed disclosure failures; it nevertheless found the case established on the evidence before it. The later striking-out of the appeal must be read alongside that history. [2][4]

A judgment still needs enforcement

The remaining public-interest question is practical: which assets can satisfy the judgment, in which jurisdictions, and when? Establishing liability and collecting against it are different stages. The sources cited here do not establish that Mozambique has recovered the full award. For a country carrying the debt, that distinction is the distance between success in court and relief in its budget.

Based on reporting from: Peters & Peters · Counsel for Mozambique · 13 May 2026; Commercial Court · [2024] EWHC 1957 (Comm) · 29 July 2024; Spotlight on Corruption · Judgment analysis · 29 July 2024; Reuters · Privinvest granted permission to appeal · 22 April 2025.