Legal Proceedings
−Removed: than as described below, neither the Company nor its property is the subject of any current, pending, or threatened legal proceedings.
−Removed: The Company is not aware of any other legal proceedings in which any director, officer or affiliate of the Company, any owner of record
−Removed: or beneficially of more than 5% of any class of the Company’s voting securities, or any associate of any such director, officer,
−Removed: affiliate or security holder of the Company, is a party adverse to the Company or any of its subsidiaries or has a material interest
−Removed: adverse to the Company or any of its subsidiaries.
−Removed: July 28, 2021, a lawsuit was filed in the US District Court for the District of Idaho brought by Crescent Mining, LLC (“Crescent”).
−Removed: The named defendants include Placer Mining, Robert Hopper Jr., and the Company.
−Removed: The lawsuit alleges that Placer Mining and Robert Hopper
−Removed: intentionally flooded the Crescent Mine during the period from 1991 and 1994, and that the Company is jointly and severally liable
−Removed: with the other defendants for unspecified past and future costs associated with the presence of AMD in the Crescent Mine.
−Removed: The plaintiff
−Removed: has requested unspecified damages.
−Removed: On September 20, 2021, the Company filed a motion to dismiss Crescent’s claims against it, contending
−Removed: that such claims are facially deficient.
−Removed: On March 2, 2022, Chief US District Court Judge, David C.
−Removed: Nye granted in part and denied
−Removed: in part the Company’s motion to dismiss.
−Removed: The court granted the Company’s motion to dismiss Crescent’s Cost Recovery
−Removed: claim under CERCLA Section 107(a), Declaratory Judgment, Tortious Interference, Trespass, Nuisance and Negligence claims.
−Removed: were dismissed without prejudice.
−Removed: The court denied the motion to dismiss filed by Placer Mining Corp.
−Removed: for Crescent’s trespass,
−Removed: nuisance and negligence claims.
−Removed: Crescent later filed an amended complaint on April 1, 2022.
+Added: Other than as described below, neither the Company nor its property is
+Added: the subject of any current, pending, or threatened legal proceedings.
+Added: The Company is not aware of any other legal proceedings in which
+Added: any director, officer or affiliate of the Company, any owner of record or beneficially of more than 5% of any class of the Company’s
+Added: voting securities, or any associate of any such director, officer, affiliate or security holder of the Company, is a party adverse to
+Added: the Company or any of its subsidiaries or has a material interest adverse to the Company or any of its subsidiaries.
+Added: On July 28, 2021, a lawsuit was filed in the US District Court for the
+Added: District of Idaho brought by Crescent Mining, LLC (“Crescent”).
+Added: The named defendants include Placer Mining, Robert Hopper
+Added: Jr., and the Company.
+Added: The lawsuit alleges that Placer Mining and Robert Hopper Jr.
+Added: intentionally flooded the Crescent Mine during the
+Added: period from 1991 and 1994, and that the Company is jointly and severally liable with the other defendants for unspecified past and future
+Added: costs associated with the presence of AMD in the Crescent Mine.
+Added: The plaintiff has requested unspecified damages.
+Added: On September 20, 2021,
+Added: the Company filed a motion to dismiss Crescent’s claims against it, contending that such claims are facially deficient.
+Added: March 2, 2022, Chief US District Court Judge, David C.
+Added: Nye granted in part and denied in part the Company’s motion to dismiss.
+Added: court granted the Company’s motion to dismiss Crescent’s Cost Recovery claim under CERCLA Section 107(a), Declaratory Judgment,
+Added: Tortious Interference, Trespass, Nuisance and Negligence claims.
+Added: These claims were dismissed without prejudice.
+Added: The court denied the motion
+Added: to dismiss filed by Placer Mining Corp.
+Added: for Crescent’s trespass, nuisance and negligence claims.
+Added: Crescent later filed an amended
+Added: complaint on April 1, 2022.
Placer Mining Corp.
−Removed: and Bunker Hill Mining
−Removed: Corp are named as co-defendants.
−Removed: The Company responded to the amended filing, refuting and denying all allegations made in the complaint
−Removed: except those that are assertions of fact as a matter of public record.
−Removed: The Company believes the lawsuit against Placer Mining Corp.
−Removed: without merit and intends to defend Placer Mining Corp.
−Removed: vigorously pursuant to the Company’s indemnification of Placer Mining Corp
−Removed: in the Sale and Purchase agreement executed between the companies for the Mine on December 15, 2021.
−Removed: October 26, 2021, the Company asserted claims against Crescent in a separate lawsuit.
−Removed: Bunker Hill Mining Corporation v.
−Removed: Venzee Technologies
+Added: and Bunker Hill Mining Corp are named as co-defendants.
+Added: Bunker Hill responded to the amended
+Added: filing, refuting and denying all allegations made in the complaint except those that are assertions of fact as a matter of public record.
+Added: The Company believes Crescent’s lawsuit is without merit and is vigorously defending itself, as well as Placer Mining Corp.
+Added: to the Company’s indemnification of Placer Mining Corp in the Sale and Purchase agreement executed between the companies for the
+Added: Mine on December 15, 2021.
+Added: On October 26, 2021, the Company asserted claims against Crescent in a
+Added: separate lawsuit, which has been consolidated into the Crescent lawsuit.
+Added: The Company commenced Bunker Hill Mining Corporation v.
+Added: Technologies Inc.
et al, Case No.
−Removed: 2:21-cv-209-REP, filed in the same court on May 14, 2021.
−Removed: The Company has subsequently executed a tolling agreement
−Removed: with Venzee in exchange for dropping its lawsuit.
−Removed: The Company originally filed this lawsuit on May 14, 2021 against other parties but
−Removed: has since filed an amended complaint to include its claims against Crescent.
−Removed: This lawsuit has been consolidated into the lawsuit Crescent
−Removed: filed on July 28, 2021.
+Added: 2:21-cv-209-REP, in the US District Court for the District of Idaho on May 14, 2021.
+Added: The Company has
+Added: subsequently executed a tolling agreement with Venzee in exchange for dropping its claims against Venzee.
+Added: The Company originally filed
+Added: this lawsuit on May 14, 2021 against other parties but has since filed an amended complaint to include its claims against Crescent.
+Added: Court consolidated the two lawsuits on April 19, 2022.
+Added: The consolidated lawsuits are currently in the discovery phase, in which information
+Added: is gathered and exchanged.
have been no changes to our risk factors as reported in our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2023.
Compared sentence by sentence after normalising whitespace, quotation marks, case and digits, so re-formatting and restated figures do not read as changed language. Wording changes appear as one removal and one addition. The current filing and the prior one are authoritative.