Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

Bullboard - Stock Discussion Forum Western Magnesium Corp V.WMG.H

Alternate Symbol(s):  MLYF

Western Magnesium Corporation is a producer of green primary magnesium metal. The Company is focused on plant operations and magnesium production. It uses a continuous silicothermic process to produce magnesium with low labor and energy costs while generating minimal waste and toxic by-products. The Company's technology eliminates inefficiencies and allows for a continuous, mass production of... see more

TSXV:WMG.H - Post Discussion

Western Magnesium Corp > Lawsuit summary from their latest filing (Form 10-K)
View:
Post by RawSienna on May 02, 2022 4:55pm

Lawsuit summary from their latest filing (Form 10-K)

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS.

 

As of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, to our knowledge, there are no legal proceedings or regulatory actions material to us to which we are a party, or have been a party to, or of which any of our property is or was the subject matter of, and no such proceedings or actions are known by us to be contemplated except as provided below:

 

James Sever Claim. On September 29, 2020, James Sever filed a Notice of Civil Claim against us in the Supreme Court of British Columbia (Court File No. S-209728) (the “Sever Claim”). The Sever Claim alleges that Mr. Sever had an employment and/or other similar contractual relationship with us, and that we breached such contractual relationship by way of constructive dismissal or similar conduct. The Sever Claim seeks damages in excess of $2,500,000, certain equity compensation, prejudgment garnishment, costs, interest and other non-monetary relief. On July 27, 2021, we filed a response to the Sever Claim, which included the following pleadings: (a) that we were never properly served with the Sever Claim; (b) that we have never had any form of employment, independent or consulting relationship or agreement with Sever; (c) that we had no debts, liabilities or obligations to Sever; (d) that to the extent that Sever had some form of employment, independent or consulting or similar relationship or agreement as alleged in the Sever Claim (the existence of which we denied) such contract or relationship, if one existed, was never with us and was with some other corporate entity and, furthermore:

 

(i) any such contract or relationship would be governed by laws of the United States;

 

(ii) all, many or some of the claims in the Sever Claim would be barred by the British Columbia Limitation Act to the extent British Columbia law applies;

 

(iii) any such contract or relationship did not exist as alleged in the Sever Claim;

 

(iv) Mr. Sever was not terminated or constructively dismissed and, instead, Mr. Sever never provided any services under any such contract or relationship because Mr. Sever abandoned or resigned from, and/or failed to fulfil any of his obligations under, any and all contracts and relationships; and/or

 

(v) Mr. Sever failed to mitigate or alternatively has mitigated.

 

We intend to vigorously defend against the Sever Claim, and we believe that the Sever Claim is without merit. We cannot predict the outcome of the claim, however.

 

GEM Yield Bahamas Limited ArbitrationOn December 31, 2020, GEM Yield Bahamas Limited (“GEM”) served us with a Notice of Intention to Arbitrate (the “New York Arbitration Notice”) before the American Arbitration Association in New York, New York (Case No. 01-21-0004-2162) (the “GEM New York Arbitration”). The New York Arbitration Notice alleges we breached a Share Subscription Agreement dated November 15, 2019 entered into between us and GEM (the “GEM Agreement”), among other things, claiming damages of CDN$4.2 million (USD$ 3.3 million). On January 19, 2021, we filed a petition in the New York Supreme Court (Index No. 650401/2021 (the “New York State Action”) to stay the GEM New York Arbitration claiming the GEM Agreement was not valid. The Court in the New York State Action ruled on March 19, 2021 that there is an arbitration clause in the GEM Agreement but it is up the arbitrator in the GEM New York Arbitration to determine if the arbitration clause is valid. Following this ruling, the New York State Action was closed. GEM filed a Statement of Claim in the GEM New York Arbitration on June 9, 2021 and on June 25, 2021, we filed a Statement of Answer denying the existence of any binding agreement between us and GEM, among other defenses. In January 2022, we filed a Modified Statement of Defense and Counterclaims. Furthermore, we intend to vigorously defend ourselves and believe the allegations against us in the GEM New York Arbitration lack merit. We cannot predict the outcome of this arbitration proceeding, however.

 

There have been no substantive motions or pleadings in the GEM New York Arbitration aside from the Statement of Claim and Statement of Answer discussed above.

 

 

23

 

 

GEM Yield Bahamas Limited and GEM Global Yield LLC SC Arbitration. On or about February 8, 2021, GEM instituted another arbitration against us before the International Centre for Dispute Resolution in Montreal Canada (Case No. 01-21-0001-1245) (the “GEM Montreal Arbitration”) and joined, GEM’s affiliate, GEM Global Yield LLC SCS (“GEM Global Yield” together with GEM, the “GEM Parties”). Similar to the allegations in the GEM New York Arbitration, the Statement of Claim filed by the GEM Parties alleges we breached a Share Subscription Agreement dated November 15, 2019 and promissory note, among other things, claiming damages of CDN$4.9 million (US $3.85 million), in addition to costs and expenses stemming from our alleged failure to issue to GEM Global Yield warrants to purchase up to 33,000,000 shares of our common stock. We filed a Statement of Defense, denying the existence of any binding agreement between us and GEM, among other defenses. In January 2022, we filed an Amended Statement of Defense and Cross-claim. We intend to vigorously defend ourselves in the GEM Montreal Arbitration and believe the allegations against us in this arbitration proceeding lack merit. We cannot predict, however, the outcome of this arbitration proceeding.

 

There have been no substantive motions or pleadings or rulings aside from the Statement of Claim and Statement of Answer.

 

Lampert Advisors, LLC Claim. On April 19, 2021, Lampert Advisors, LLC (“Lampert”) filed a Verified Complaint against our wholly owned subsidiary Western Magnesium Corporation, a Nevada corporation (“Western Magnesium – Nevada”) in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York (Index No. 652738/2021) (the “Lampert Lawsuit”). The complaint filed in the Lampert Lawsuit alleges that Lampert entered into an agreement with Western Magnesium – Nevada to provide various financial advisory services including acquisition advisory services and act as an exclusive placement agent for a debt and equity securities (the “Lampert Agreement”), that it performed all services required under that agreement and such services were received and accepted by our subsidiary, that it is owed $367,227.32 plus interest at the rate of 9% from February 3, 2021 and that it has a right of first refusal to act as financial advisor in connection with any debt, equity or debt restructuring assignments on terms, conditions and compensation customary for Lampert for a transaction of the type contemplated. Although Lampert claims to have personally served Western Magnesium – Nevada, the company never received the Summons and Complaint and therefore, never submitted a response.

 

On September 9, 2021, Lampert filed a Motion seeking the entry of a default judgment (the “Motion”) alleging that Western Magnesium – Nevada failed to file an answer or motion with respect to the complaint in this lawsuit within the time period provided under the civil rules of procedure. We opposed Lampert’s motion for entry of a default judgment and filed a cross-motion to compel Lampert to accept our answer. The Court granted our cross-motion seeking to compel Lampert to accept our answer and denied Lampert’s Motion seeking the entry of a default judgment as moot. The Court scheduled a preliminary conference for the parties on March 30, 2022.

 

We intend to vigorously defend ourselves and believe the allegations against us in the Lampert Lawsuit lack merit. We cannot predict the outcome of this lawsuit, however.

 

Litigation Assessment

 

We have evaluated the foregoing claims to assess the likelihood of any unfavorable outcome and to estimate, if possible, the amount of potential loss as it relates to the litigation discussed above. Based on this assessment and estimate, which includes an understanding of our intention to vigorously defend the claims against us, we believe that the claims of any of the plaintiffs lack merit, however, and we cannot predict the likelihood of any recoveries by any of the plaintiffs against us. This assessment and estimate is based on the information available to management as of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K and involves a significant amount of management judgment, including the inherent difficulty associated with assessing litigation matters in their early stages. As a result, the actual outcome or loss may differ materially from those envisioned by the current assessment and estimate. Our failure to successfully defend or settle these claims could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, revenue and profitability and could cause the market value of our common stock to decline.

Comment by Sherry35 on Sep 29, 2022 11:45am
Floating this May 5 2022 post to the top of the heap. All indications from the absence of published lab reports and the cheesey CTO video, Sever's claim maybe delaying the commissioning of the technology. This may apply to the US launched lawsuits. Read the last sentence below. Also, my posts on this legal situation gating commisioning are still intact. So far the winners in these lawsuits ...more  
Comment by Sherry35 on Sep 30, 2022 10:05am
Just wondering if all of WMG's costs in servicing this Sever lawsuit over the past few quarters would cover the $2.5M damages. The costs being lawyer fees, court fees, accountant fees (?), WMG employee salaries. Then there are the irrate investors and delay in revenue. Hmmmm...is Sever's lawsuit gating the progress of the company?
The Market Update
{{currentVideo.title}} {{currentVideo.relativeTime}}
< Previous bulletin
Next bulletin >

At the Bell logo
A daily snapshot of everything
from market open to close.

{{currentVideo.companyName}}
{{currentVideo.intervieweeName}}{{currentVideo.intervieweeTitle}}
< Previous
Next >
Dealroom for high-potential pre-IPO opportunities