Unlock stock picks and a broker-level newsfeed that powers Wall Street.

Seabridge Comments on Second Challenge of KSM's Substantially Started Determination

In This Article:

Toronto, Ontario--(Newsfile Corp. - December 2, 2024) - Seabridge Gold Inc. (TSX: SEA) (NYSE: SA) ("Seabridge" or the "Company") announced today that a second and new Petition has been filed in the British Columbia Supreme Court against the Minister of Environment and Climate Change Strategy of British Columbia (the "Minister") and against Seabridge's wholly-owned subsidiary, KSM Mining ULC ("KSMCo"), seeking judicial review of the determination (the "SS Determination"), on July 25, 2024, by the Minister that Seabridge's KSM Project has been "substantially started". The SS Determination resulted in the KSM Project Environmental Assessment Certificate ("EAC") no longer being subject to expiry on July 29, 2026.

This new Petition has been filed by SkeenaWild Conservation Trust and Southeast Alaska Indigenous Transboundary Commission ("SEITC", and collectively, the "New Petitioners"). Although its name includes the word "Commission", SEITC has no regulatory authority of any kind in relation to the SS Determination or the KSM Project. This new Petition, which only challenges the SS Determination on the basis that it was unreasonable, makes essentially the same arguments on reasonableness as the previous one. In addition to alleging that the SS Determination was unreasonable, the New Petitioners are seeking an order that the SS Determination be quashed and remitted to the Minister for reconsideration. The first Petition challenging the SS Determination on the grounds that it was unreasonable, was filed on November 22, 2024 by the Tsetsaut Skii km Lax Ha (see the Company's news release of November 25, 2024). In the hearing on both Petitions, the Petitioners have to establish that the Minister's decision was unreasonable, not simply incorrect. The legislation leaves the Minister with a lot of discretion in making a "substantially started" determination, making the threshold of "unreasonable" even harder to meet.

The New Petitioners are challenging the SS Determination as public interest advocates rather than as private litigants who claim rights or property interests in the KSM Project area. Both groups have a history of vocal opposition to all mining projects within their regions. All three of the Petitioners made submissions to the Minister opposing the Company's application for the SS Determination, making similar arguments as they are making in their Petitions. This is the third legal proceeding brought by SEITC against the KSM Project; the two previous proceedings were brought challenging KSM's 2014 EAC.