Glencore is facing a threatened lawsuit exceeding $1.4 billion from a Singapore-based commodity trader while negotiating a strategic deal involving two of the Democratic Republic of Congo’s largest copper and cobalt operations.
Radiant World has accused the Swiss commodities group of causing it substantial losses after their trading relationship collapsed, according to documents reviewed by the Financial Times.
The proposed claims have not resulted in a court judgment, and Radiant has not been awarded any money.
Glencore has rejected the allegations as meritless. The company maintains that it suffered losses from its dealings with Radiant and has already made provisions for its remaining exposure.
The dispute comes as Glencore works towards a separate transaction that could give a US-backed consortium a 40% interest in the company’s stakes in Kamoto Copper Company and Mutanda Mining in the DRC.
Glencore and the Orion Critical Mineral Consortium announced a non-binding agreement in February that placed an enterprise value of approximately $9 billion, including debt, on the Congolese operations.
The $9 billion figure is not the amount Orion has agreed to pay. It is the combined valuation being used for negotiations over the proposed 40% interest.
**DON'T MISS THIS: ****U.S. steps up efforts to counter China in Africa with $9b move to buy 40% of Glencore’s DRC mines**
There is no evidence that Radiant’s threatened claim has delayed or disrupted the Congo negotiations. Its potential effect on the transaction is, for now, a corporate-risk question rather than a confirmed consequence.
**A relationship that ended in a billion-dollar dispute**
Radiant World describes itself as one of the world’s largest independent iron-ore traders.
Its Singapore business reported approximately $9.6 billion in revenue for the financial year ending in September 2025. Radiant says the wider group trades more than 80 million tonnes of iron ore annually.
The company and an affiliated business, Sapphire Minmetals, entered derivatives transactions with Glencore connected to their physical commodity trading.
Glencore closed some of those positions and sought repayment of approximately $1.2 billion in exposure attributed to the two businesses.
**DON'T MISS THIS:****DR Congo’s tax battle with Glencore puts strategic copper mine at centre of US minerals push**
Radiant alleges that Glencore was more deeply involved in its operations than a conventional trading counterparty and that its conduct contributed to the losses now being claimed.
The Singapore company says Glencore once held a warrant capable of giving it an interest approaching 5% in Radiant and that the companies had discussed a possible outside investment.
Radiant has placed its claimed loss at more than $1.4 billion. Glencore disputes that account. It says the proposed legal claims lack merit and that it was the party harmed by the relationship.
The dispute has emerged during a broader crisis at Radiant.
The US Department of Justice, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and Singapore police are investigating allegations involving trade documents used in financing transactions, Reuters reported.
Radiant has denied wrongdoing and said allegations that its documents were invalid are false.
Japan’s Mizuho Bank has also started proceedings in Singapore seeking to prevent Radiant from transferring certain assets. Trade-finance company Incomlend is separately seeking approximately $34 million.
None of those claims has established that Radiant committed fraud.
**Glencore has already provided for its exposure**
The precise size of Glencore’s remaining exposure has been disputed.
Sources previously placed its gross exposure at between $500 million and $800 million. Glencore said in August that its net exposure was well below $500 million after provisions and was not financially material to the group.
Chief executive Gary Nagle said the company had stopped conducting new business with Radiant.
The proposed $1.4 billion claim nevertheless introduces a potential liability significantly larger than Glencore’s publicly stated remaining exposure.
The difference exists partly because the two companies disagree over who caused the losses.
Glencore regards itself as a creditor that took a financial hit. Radiant is presenting itself as the injured party and threatening to claim damages.
A court or arbitration tribunal would have to determine which account is supported by the contracts, trading records and communications between the companies.
**The strategic Congo assets behind Glencore’s unfinished deal**
The dispute comes at a sensitive time for Glencore’s African copper and cobalt business.
The company signed a preliminary agreement with the US-backed Orion consortium in February covering a possible 40% interest in its holdings in Kamoto Copper Company and Mutanda Mining.
The mines produced a combined 247,800 tonnes of copper and 33,500 tonnes of cobalt in 2025.
Those metals are essential to electricity networks, electric vehicles, batteries, data centres and defence manufacturing.
The transaction is also part of a wider US effort to secure critical minerals from the DRC and reduce China’s influence over strategically important supply chains.
Under the proposed arrangement, Orion would nominate non-executive directors to the mining businesses and direct the sale of its share of their production. Glencore would continue operating the mines.
The parties must still complete due diligence, negotiate binding agreements and obtain regulatory approvals.
Glencore has not said whether the threatened Radiant claim was included in information supplied to the consortium or whether it could affect the final price.
Follow the story