Unformatted text preview: proposed class proceeding under Ontario’s Class Proceedings Act, 1992, was filed in
the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (the “Ontario Court”) on March 12, 2012, entitled Trustees of the
Musicians’ Pension Fund of Canada v. Kinross Gold Corporation et al. (the “First Ontario Action”). A
statement of claim in the First Ontario Action was subsequently served on April 11, 2012. The Ontario Action
named as defendants the Company, Tye Burt, former President and CEO, Paul Barry, former Executive Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer, Glen Masterman, Senior Vice President, Exploration, and Kenneth
Thomas, former Senior Vice President, Projects. The First Ontario Action alleges, among other things, that
Kinross made a number of misrepresentations relating to the quantity and quality of gold ore at the Tasiast
mine and the costs of operating the mine, and that Kinross and the individual defendants knew that such
misrepresentations were false or misleading when made. The plaintiff is seeking certification of the action as
a class proceeding and leave to proceed under the statutory civil liability provisions of Ontario ’s Securities
Act. A hearing on the plaintiff’s certification motion has been scheduled for October 22 -25, 2013. The
plaintiff is also seeking various relief, including damages in the amount of CDN$4 billion and costs of the
action. Kinross intends to vigorously defend against the First Ontario Action and believes it is without merit.
A notice of action in a second proposed class proceeding was filed in the Ontario Court on March 16, 2012
and a corresponding statement of claim was served with the notice of action on April 17, 2012 entitled Earl
Downey and John Doe I v. Kinross Gold Corporation et al. (the “Second Ontario Action”). The Second Ontario
Action names the same defendants as the First Ontario Action and, in addition, names Tasiast Mauritanie
Limited S.A. (“TMLSA”), an indirect subsidiary of Kinross that is incorporated and headquartered in
Mauritania. TMLSA disputes that it was validly served with the claim in Ontario and reserves its right to
contest the jurisdiction of the Ontario Court...
View Full Document
This document was uploaded on 03/30/2014.
- Spring '14