For Phahama Grain Phakama, the reaction to Friday’s court ruling came down to one word: disappointment. The small farmers’ organisation said small and emerging black soybean producers now remain exposed to pricing practices it believes threaten their profitability and undermine efforts to build sustainable black-owned farming businesses.
The group’s concerns followed the Gauteng Division of the High Court’s decision to strike from the roll an urgent application brought by Grain SA, the industry body that had sought interim relief to halt the JSE’s move away from the soybean multiple reference point (MRP) model and back to a single reference point (SRP) model. The court found the matter was not urgent. Crucially, Grain SA said, the interim application was never adjudicated on its merits, meaning the substance of the dispute remains untested. The organisation said it will approach the office of the deputy judge president of the Johannesburg High Court for an expedited hearing of the interim application on its merits.
“Despite Grain SA’s arguments based on authorities and case law, the court found that the relief sought was not urgent and the matter was struck from the roll,” the organisation said. The interim interdict had been sought pending the finalisation of a separate review application to set aside the JSE’s decision.
For the farmers PGP represents, the setback carries a heavy practical weight. The organisation said smaller producers must plant, secure financing, harvest and market their crops while facing pricing deductions that can reduce the prices they ultimately receive. Deductions published in the futures market, it said, could be used as standard deductions in the physical market, even when they do not reflect actual transport costs or local supply and demand. Many smaller producers also have limited access to hedging tools, even though futures market pricing structures influence their selling prices.
PGP chairperson Jeremia Mathebula said farmers feel powerless. “They do not have the balance sheets, logistics networks, storage capacity or negotiating strength to counter the inefficiencies in these market structures,” Mathebula said.
Geography compounds the problem. Many black grain farmers operate in remote rural areas, including the former homeland areas of the Eastern Cape, KwaZulu-Natal, Mpumalanga and other developing regions, often farming far from major commercial centres with fewer commercial buyers, limited storage options and substantially less bargaining power.
“This important matter will now be relegated to a lengthy legal process, opposed by powerful role-players, while small and emerging black soybean farmers continue to carry a disproportionate burden,” PGP said.
By contrast, Grain SA framed the ruling as procedural rather than decisive. Its review application was issued and served on the JSE on 27 October, and that process is ongoing. “Friday’s outcome does not determine the merits of the review application,” the organisation said.
Grain SA also raised concerns about the exchange’s conduct since the interim application was launched on 13 August, saying the JSE had continued listing soybean futures contracts until March 2028. The listings, it alleged, took place unusually early and were contrary to the customary practice of listing futures contracts about a year in advance.
Chairperson Richard Krige argued the existing system could have remained in place while the court considered the application. “Instead, the JSE pressed ahead and then relied on its own actions to argue that it was too late to intervene. Producers are entitled to question whether their concerns were ever going to receive meaningful consideration,” Krige said. “Given this conduct, producers have lost faith in the platform’s willingness to consider their interests fairly. An independent exchange depends on the trust of its participants.”
Meanwhile, others in the sector echoed the frustration. Bennie van Zyl, general manager of TLU SA, said the organisation was disappointed with the ruling. “They say it is not urgent, but farmers have to plant. They have to make urgent decisions to remain profitable and continue producing food for food security,” Van Zyl said. He said the ruling could delay a solution for farmers seeking to remain sustainable.
Professor Simphiwe Madikizela, a senior lecturer in economics at Unisa’s Graduate School of Business Leadership, offered a sober read of the outcome. The ruling, he said, does not bring the underlying dispute to an end and is essentially a procedural setback for Grain SA in its attempt to temporarily prevent the JSE from implementing its decision.
The fundamental economic question, in his view, is whether the pricing methodology accurately reflects the geographical distribution of soybean production, processing capacity, transport costs and the actual movement of the commodity in South Africa. “The immediate implication is that soybean producers will have to prepare for the implementation of the single reference point model while the legal review process continues,” Madikizela said.
He noted that location differentials influence the relationship between soybean futures prices and the prices producers ultimately negotiate in the physical market, and warned the dispute could carry significant financial implications for producers already squeezed by input costs, financing expenses, fuel prices and climate-related production risks.
“South Africa needs a soybean pricing system that supports the sustainability of farmers, encourages investment in agricultural production, strengthens market confidence and ultimately contributes to food security and economic growth,” he said.
For now, that debate moves back to the courtroom and the review process, while the farmers at its centre continue planting, borrowing and selling under a pricing system they have yet to persuade a court, or the exchange, to change.