UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
Form 6-K
REPORT OF FOREIGN PRIVATE ISSUER PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-16 OR 15d-16 UNDER
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
Report on Form 6-K for December 14, 2010
Commission File Number 1-31615
Sasol Limited
1 Sturdee Avenue
Rosebank 2196
South Africa
(Name and address of registrant’s principal executive office)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant files or will file annual reports under cover of Form 20-F or
Form 40-F.
Form 20-F __X__ Form 40-F _____
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is submitting the Form 6-K in paper as permitted by Regulation S-
T Rule 101(b)(1): ____
T Rule 101(b)(1): ____
Note: Regulation S-T Rule 101(b)(1) only permits the submission in paper of a Form 6-K if submitted
solely to provide an attached annual report to security holders.
solely to provide an attached annual report to security holders.
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is submitting the Form 6-K in paper as permitted by Regulation S-
T Rule 101(b)(7): ____
T Rule 101(b)(7): ____
Note: Regulation S-T Rule 101(b)(7) only permits the submission in paper of a Form 6-K if submitted to
furnish a report or other document that the registrant foreign private issuer must furnish and make public
under the laws of the jurisdiction in which the registrant is incorporated, domiciled or legally organized
(the registrant’s “home country”), or under the rules of the home country exchange on which the
registrant’s securities are traded, as long as the report or other document is not a press release, is not
required to be and has not been distributed to the registrant’s security holders, and, if discussing a material
event, has already been the subject of a Form 6-K submission or other Commission filing on EDGAR.
furnish a report or other document that the registrant foreign private issuer must furnish and make public
under the laws of the jurisdiction in which the registrant is incorporated, domiciled or legally organized
(the registrant’s “home country”), or under the rules of the home country exchange on which the
registrant’s securities are traded, as long as the report or other document is not a press release, is not
required to be and has not been distributed to the registrant’s security holders, and, if discussing a material
event, has already been the subject of a Form 6-K submission or other Commission filing on EDGAR.
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant by furnishing the information contained in this Form is also
thereby furnishing the information to the Commission pursuant to Rule 12g3-2(b) under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.
thereby furnishing the information to the Commission pursuant to Rule 12g3-2(b) under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.
Yes _____ No __X__
If “Yes” is marked, indicate below the file number assigned to the registrant in connection with Rule
12g3-2(b):
82-_______________.
12g3-2(b):
82-_______________.
Enclosures:
SASOL POLYMERS’ SETTLEMENT OF SECTION 4 COMPLAINT
Sasol Limited
(Incorporated in the Republic of South Africa)
(Registration number 1979/003231/06)
Share codes: JSE : SOL NYSE : SSL
ISIN codes: ZAE000006896 US8038663006
(“Sasol” or “the Company”)
SASOL POLYMERS’ SETTLEMENT OF SECTION 4 COMPLAINT
As previously disclosed by Sasol as part of its ongoing
disclosures, the South African Competition Commission has been
investigating the South African polymers industry. Sasol
Polymers, a division of Sasol Chemical Industries Limited (“Sasol
Polymers”), has now concluded a settlement agreement with the
Competition Commission (“the Commission”) in relation to its
existing propylene supply agreement (“the Supply Agreement”) with
Safripol (Proprietary) Limited (“Safripol”). The Commission
concluded that the pricing provisions of the Supply Agreement
gave rise to indirect price fixing between Sasol Polymers and
Safripol.
The Supply Agreement was concluded pursuant to concerns raised by
Safripol in relation to the proposed merger in 1993 of Sasol and
AECI Limited’s monomer, polymer and certain other chemical
operations. To address these concerns, the then Competition
Board required a supply agreement, which would ensure Safripol’s
ongoing access to propylene according to a pricing formula, which
would result in market-related prices. At the time, neither party
understood this pricing formula to give rise to competition law
concerns. However, the Commission, in terms of the current
Competition Act, found that the pricing formula, which required
the exchange of pricing information amounts to indirect price
fixing. This contravention is technical in nature and was not
as a result of an intentional agreement to fix prices. The terms
of the Supply Agreement, including the pricing formula, were
prompted by the Competition Board’s requirements.
Given the uncertainty surrounding the legal position in relation
to the pricing formula and the technicality of the matter, it was
considered prudent to settle the matter. Sasol Polymers has
therefore agreed to pay a penalty of R 111 690 000, which
represents 3% of Sasol Polymers’ turnover derived from its sale
of polypropylene products for its financial year ending 2009. The
settlement agreement is in full and final settlement of the
Commission's allegations that the pricing formula gave rise to
indirect price fixing.
The settlement agreement is subject to confirmation by the
Tribunal.
Norbert Behrens, general manager group strategy and planning at
Sasol said, "As previously indicated Sasol completed an extensive
competition law compliance review in 2009. This is one of the
(Incorporated in the Republic of South Africa)
(Registration number 1979/003231/06)
Share codes: JSE : SOL NYSE : SSL
ISIN codes: ZAE000006896 US8038663006
(“Sasol” or “the Company”)
SASOL POLYMERS’ SETTLEMENT OF SECTION 4 COMPLAINT
As previously disclosed by Sasol as part of its ongoing
disclosures, the South African Competition Commission has been
investigating the South African polymers industry. Sasol
Polymers, a division of Sasol Chemical Industries Limited (“Sasol
Polymers”), has now concluded a settlement agreement with the
Competition Commission (“the Commission”) in relation to its
existing propylene supply agreement (“the Supply Agreement”) with
Safripol (Proprietary) Limited (“Safripol”). The Commission
concluded that the pricing provisions of the Supply Agreement
gave rise to indirect price fixing between Sasol Polymers and
Safripol.
The Supply Agreement was concluded pursuant to concerns raised by
Safripol in relation to the proposed merger in 1993 of Sasol and
AECI Limited’s monomer, polymer and certain other chemical
operations. To address these concerns, the then Competition
Board required a supply agreement, which would ensure Safripol’s
ongoing access to propylene according to a pricing formula, which
would result in market-related prices. At the time, neither party
understood this pricing formula to give rise to competition law
concerns. However, the Commission, in terms of the current
Competition Act, found that the pricing formula, which required
the exchange of pricing information amounts to indirect price
fixing. This contravention is technical in nature and was not
as a result of an intentional agreement to fix prices. The terms
of the Supply Agreement, including the pricing formula, were
prompted by the Competition Board’s requirements.
Given the uncertainty surrounding the legal position in relation
to the pricing formula and the technicality of the matter, it was
considered prudent to settle the matter. Sasol Polymers has
therefore agreed to pay a penalty of R 111 690 000, which
represents 3% of Sasol Polymers’ turnover derived from its sale
of polypropylene products for its financial year ending 2009. The
settlement agreement is in full and final settlement of the
Commission's allegations that the pricing formula gave rise to
indirect price fixing.
The settlement agreement is subject to confirmation by the
Tribunal.
Norbert Behrens, general manager group strategy and planning at
Sasol said, "As previously indicated Sasol completed an extensive
competition law compliance review in 2009. This is one of the
matters outstanding and is now being brought to finality, in line
with our approach to be fully compliant and resolve any
competition law issues including technical ones.”
As part of its investigation into the polymer industry, the
Commission has also contended that the prices at which Sasol
Polymers supplies propylene and polypropylene are excessive.
Sasol Polymers does not agree with the Commission's position in
this regard and is contesting the Commission's allegations.
Consequently, the Commission's allegations in respect of
excessive pricing do not form any part of the settlement
agreement concluded between the parties.
14 December 2010
Johannesburg
Sponsor
Deutsche Securities (SA) (Proprietary) Limited
with our approach to be fully compliant and resolve any
competition law issues including technical ones.”
As part of its investigation into the polymer industry, the
Commission has also contended that the prices at which Sasol
Polymers supplies propylene and polypropylene are excessive.
Sasol Polymers does not agree with the Commission's position in
this regard and is contesting the Commission's allegations.
Consequently, the Commission's allegations in respect of
excessive pricing do not form any part of the settlement
agreement concluded between the parties.
14 December 2010
Johannesburg
Sponsor
Deutsche Securities (SA) (Proprietary) Limited
SIGNATURE
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant, Sasol Limited, has
duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
Date: December 14, 2010
duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
Date: December 14, 2010
By:
/s/ N L Joubert
Name: Nereus Louis Joubert
Title: Company Secretary
Name: Nereus Louis Joubert
Title: Company Secretary