The US’s largest gas pipeline group, , recently attempted to buy its smaller rival, , but was rebuffed in its effort to create an $80bn energy transportation giant, people briefed on the negotiations said.

Despite the rejection, Enterprise Products remains interested in a deal for Williams and may make another offer, the people added. Enterprise Products and Williams declined to comment. Shares in Williams were up 9 per cent in early afternoon trading after the rejection was disclosed, giving it a market value of nearly $21.1bn.

The takeover bid came just weeks after the planned $33bn sale of Williams to another rival, (ETE), following a bitter court battle. Since then, Oklahoma-based Williams has suffered a series of boardroom upheavals, with six of 13 directors resigning following a failed attempt to oust the company’s chief executive, Alan Armstrong.

Among the directors that stepped down from the Williams board were two activist investors, Keith Meister of Corvex Management and Eric Mandelblatt of Soroban Capital Partners, who are thought to be in favour of the company considering fresh takeover offers.

The structure of the offer made by Enterprise Products could not be learned. Both companies declined to comment.

The US oil and gas pipeline sector, which traditionally has not been a hotbed of dealmaking, has been under sustained pressure following the collapse in energy prices since 2014.

Enterprise Products, which is based in Houston, Texas, has seen its share price drop by about 28 per cent over that period. It had a market value of $58.4bn before details of the deal were made public on Thursday. A deal with Williams would allow Enterprise Products to cut costs and reshape its pipeline portfolio.

Williams announced on Monday it had appointed three independent board members. Kathleen Cooper, the board chairman, said they would be adding more soon. “Williams is looking forward to broadening the expertise and perspective of the Board with the addition of three new, independent directors in the near term,” Ms Cooper said.

The previous deal for Williams collapsed after Latham & Watkins, the lawyers for ETE, said they were not in a position to provide an opinion on whether the transaction would be tax-free, which was a mandatory condition to the successful completion of the transaction.

Williams disputed ETE’s position and decided to sue its merger partner to force it to go through with the deal. However, a Delaware judge sided with ETE, arguing that the company had acted in good faith.

Williams accused ETE of using the tax opinion argument as a way to get out of a deal their chief executive Kelcy Warren regretted doing following a sharp fall in oil prices after the takeover was agreed in September 2015.