\u201cI was willing to be called many things when I agreed to fund this case. A criminal was never one of them,\u201d said Elsdon.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cI will not be branded a criminal for honouring a contract, and I will answer that accusation where it belongs: in court.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Elsdon said Makate\u2019s accusations of fraud were false, malicious, and defamatory. He confirmed that he instructed his attorneys to sue Makate for defamation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cWith the dispute now before the High Court, the public will learn for the first time who promoted the case and carried the risk that made the settlement possible.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
According to Elsdon, much has been said about how the Please Call Me matter ended and about Makate, the lone underdog who took on a corporate giant.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cFar less has been said about how the claim began: unfunded, untested and stalled, until someone was prepared to pay for it and to carry the risk of losing the funding if the case failed,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cWith the dispute over the proceeds now before the High Court, that record will be examined in open court for the first time.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Elsdon said the public will see that this was never simply David against Goliath. \u201cThis \u2018David\u2019 was backed, from the outset, by a team of funders through Black Rock,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Elsdon said that Makate\u2019s claim against Vodacom was first brought to him and the late Christiaan Schoeman in 2011.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cAs originally framed, it faced serious difficulties; over the following weeks, the cause of action was substantially reworked,\u201d said Elsdon.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cIt was on the strength of that reformulated case that the funding was put in place.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Black Rock\u2019s agreement with Makate in 2011<\/h2>\n\n\n\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/mybroadband.co.za\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/Nkosana-Makate-and-Errol-Elsdon.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\nFrom 2011, the litigation proceeded under a written funding agreement with Black Rock Mining as the funding party, a position later confirmed by an arbitrator.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
That arbitrator found that Black Rock was the only entity validly nominated under that agreement. Crucially, Elsdon contended the arbitrator ruled that Black Rock\u2019s nomination was never cancelled.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Makate disputes this, arguing in court papers that the litigation funding contract was void ab initio<\/em> due to fraud, or, in the alternative, cancelled by mutual agreement.<\/p>\n\n\n\nHe has also previously said the arbitrator had made no ruling about whether Black Rock\u2019s nomination was cancelled.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Makate noted that Black Rock, which is incorporated in the British Virgin Islands, had been deregistered at the time of the arbitration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This led him to believe the dispute with his former funders had been settled. Black Rock was deregistered on 30 April 2014 and only restored to the register in December 2020, without his knowledge.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Regarding Black Rock\u2019s registration in the British Virgin Islands, and its period of deregistration due to an unpaid annual fee, Elsdon said the lapse was administrative.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cIt was cured by the company\u2019s restoration, which under BVI law is treated as if the company had never been deregistered, and the nomination in any event predated it,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThese are technical questions, now properly before the courts.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Elsdon also rejected the rest of Makate\u2019s argument. \u201cWhat is in issue is not whether that agreement was made, but Makate\u2019s attempt, years later, to escape its terms,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThe funding was not one man\u2019s money, and Black Rock was not one man\u2019s pocket. The capital was raised from, and the risk shared among, a group of backers.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This included arms-length institutional funding partners, which Elsdon said allowed them to retain a professional legal team, partly on a contingency basis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThe funding was provided from the outset of the reworked case, to launch the action, and it was advanced entirely at risk: had the case failed, those who put up the money would have recovered nothing.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Victory against Vodacom was only possible because of us \u2014 former backer<\/h2>\n\n\n\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/mybroadband.co.za\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Errol.jpg\")
Errol Elsdon, former funder of Nkosana Makate<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\nElsdon said that when they first met, Makate had no money of his own with which to pursue the claim. \u201cI do not begrudge Makate a cent of his success, but it did not come from nowhere,\u201d said Elsdon.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cIt came from a reworked case, a legal team, and money put up by people who were prepared to lose every cent of it.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Elsdon said to take that result and then brand the man who funded the action a fraudster was not the act of an underdog.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cIt is the act of someone who would rather rewrite the story than honour the agreement that made it possible.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Furthermore, Elsdon vehemently denied that attempting to enforce the terms of their initial contract with Makate could be characterised as extortion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cExtortion is a demand for something you have no right to. A funding agreement is the opposite: a contract, freely signed, under which those who take the risk share in the result,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cAsking to be held to the very terms that brought a claim to court is not a threat. It is how litigation finance works the world over.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Elsdon said that without the money, Makate\u2019s claim, like many meritorious claims before it, would never have seen the light of day.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
With the matter now before the courts in a public forum, Elsdon said the public will learn, for the first time, the real reason Makate was able to secure his settlement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cIt was not the story of a man who did it alone, but of a claim that reached court only because others were prepared to fund it, on risk, when no one else would,\u201d said Elsdon.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cFor years, this story has been told in a single voice. Now the evidence and documents will speak for themselves.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
MyBroadband contacted Makate for comment. This article will be updated with his feedback if received.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Nkosana Kenneth Makate’s former financial backer, Errol Elsdon, has announced that he is suing for defamation.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":15,"featured_media":652722,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":true,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[14],"tags":[102165,20999,102278,20801,41],"class_list":["post-654446","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-cellular","tag-black-rock-mining","tag-errol-elsdon","tag-nkosana-kenneth-makate","tag-please-call-me","tag-vodacom"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/mybroadband.co.za\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/654446"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/mybroadband.co.za\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/mybroadband.co.za\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mybroadband.co.za\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/15"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mybroadband.co.za\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=654446"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/mybroadband.co.za\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/654446\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":654451,"href":"https:\/\/mybroadband.co.za\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/654446\/revisions\/654451"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mybroadband.co.za\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/652722"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/mybroadband.co.za\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=654446"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mybroadband.co.za\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=654446"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mybroadband.co.za\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=654446"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
<\/figure>\n\n\n\nFrom 2011, the litigation proceeded under a written funding agreement with Black Rock Mining as the funding party, a position later confirmed by an arbitrator.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
That arbitrator found that Black Rock was the only entity validly nominated under that agreement. Crucially, Elsdon contended the arbitrator ruled that Black Rock\u2019s nomination was never cancelled.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Makate disputes this, arguing in court papers that the litigation funding contract was void ab initio<\/em> due to fraud, or, in the alternative, cancelled by mutual agreement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n He has also previously said the arbitrator had made no ruling about whether Black Rock\u2019s nomination was cancelled.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Makate noted that Black Rock, which is incorporated in the British Virgin Islands, had been deregistered at the time of the arbitration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This led him to believe the dispute with his former funders had been settled. Black Rock was deregistered on 30 April 2014 and only restored to the register in December 2020, without his knowledge.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Regarding Black Rock\u2019s registration in the British Virgin Islands, and its period of deregistration due to an unpaid annual fee, Elsdon said the lapse was administrative.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cIt was cured by the company\u2019s restoration, which under BVI law is treated as if the company had never been deregistered, and the nomination in any event predated it,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThese are technical questions, now properly before the courts.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Elsdon also rejected the rest of Makate\u2019s argument. \u201cWhat is in issue is not whether that agreement was made, but Makate\u2019s attempt, years later, to escape its terms,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThe funding was not one man\u2019s money, and Black Rock was not one man\u2019s pocket. The capital was raised from, and the risk shared among, a group of backers.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n This included arms-length institutional funding partners, which Elsdon said allowed them to retain a professional legal team, partly on a contingency basis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThe funding was provided from the outset of the reworked case, to launch the action, and it was advanced entirely at risk: had the case failed, those who put up the money would have recovered nothing.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Elsdon said that when they first met, Makate had no money of his own with which to pursue the claim. \u201cI do not begrudge Makate a cent of his success, but it did not come from nowhere,\u201d said Elsdon.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cIt came from a reworked case, a legal team, and money put up by people who were prepared to lose every cent of it.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Elsdon said to take that result and then brand the man who funded the action a fraudster was not the act of an underdog.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cIt is the act of someone who would rather rewrite the story than honour the agreement that made it possible.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Furthermore, Elsdon vehemently denied that attempting to enforce the terms of their initial contract with Makate could be characterised as extortion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cExtortion is a demand for something you have no right to. A funding agreement is the opposite: a contract, freely signed, under which those who take the risk share in the result,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cAsking to be held to the very terms that brought a claim to court is not a threat. It is how litigation finance works the world over.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Elsdon said that without the money, Makate\u2019s claim, like many meritorious claims before it, would never have seen the light of day.<\/p>\n\n\n\n With the matter now before the courts in a public forum, Elsdon said the public will learn, for the first time, the real reason Makate was able to secure his settlement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cIt was not the story of a man who did it alone, but of a claim that reached court only because others were prepared to fund it, on risk, when no one else would,\u201d said Elsdon.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cFor years, this story has been told in a single voice. Now the evidence and documents will speak for themselves.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n MyBroadband contacted Makate for comment. This article will be updated with his feedback if received.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Nkosana Kenneth Makate’s former financial backer, Errol Elsdon, has announced that he is suing for defamation.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":15,"featured_media":652722,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":true,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[14],"tags":[102165,20999,102278,20801,41],"class_list":["post-654446","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-cellular","tag-black-rock-mining","tag-errol-elsdon","tag-nkosana-kenneth-makate","tag-please-call-me","tag-vodacom"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/mybroadband.co.za\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/654446"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/mybroadband.co.za\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/mybroadband.co.za\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mybroadband.co.za\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/15"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mybroadband.co.za\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=654446"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/mybroadband.co.za\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/654446\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":654451,"href":"https:\/\/mybroadband.co.za\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/654446\/revisions\/654451"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mybroadband.co.za\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/652722"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/mybroadband.co.za\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=654446"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mybroadband.co.za\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=654446"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mybroadband.co.za\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=654446"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Victory against Vodacom was only possible because of us \u2014 former backer<\/h2>\n\n\n\n