InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 698
Posts 59465
Boards Moderated 18
Alias Born 06/01/2008

Re: island_looker post# 1586

Monday, 05/27/2013 11:34:39 AM

Monday, May 27, 2013 11:34:39 AM

Post# of 2992
Notice To Barrick (ABX)
NEWS RELEASE
August 1st, 2012

NOTICE TO BARRICK (ABX)

Management of Mountainstar Gold Inc., the Company, upon the advice of counsel, wish to disseminate to the public a letter that we delivered to Barrick Gold Corporation today:

August 1, 2012 Our File No: [ ]

Barrick Gold Corporation
Brookfield Place
TD Canada Trust Tower
Suite 3700, 161 Bay Street
Toronto, ON M5J 2S1

Attention: Sybil E. Veenman
Senior Vice-President and General Counsel

Dear Sirs/Mesdames:

Re: Barrick Gold Corporation and its subsidiaries, Cia Minera Nevada Ltda., Cia Minera Nevada SpA (together, “Barrick”): Pascua Lama Project (the “Project”), the “Pascua Lama Protocol”, the Securities Act of 1933 and Ontario Securities Act continuous disclosure requirements, related news publications

We are the solicitors for Mountainstar Gold Inc. (formerly Mountain-West Resources Inc.). We are writing further to Barrick’s numerous filings on SEDAR and EDGAR, and Barrick’s December 21, 2011 Info Release respecting Barrick’s Pascua Lama Project, which publications make false assertions of ownership over a portion of the mining concessions on the Chilean side of the Project.

In particular, Barrick has asserted ownership of the concessions called Tesoro Uno 1 -30 to Tesoro Doce 1 – 5, inclusive (the “Tesoro Concessions”), as shown in the list of concessions included in the Pascua Lama Protocol, published on page 8 of the “Diario Oficial de la Republica de Chile”.

Barrick has also asserted ownership of all concessions included in Appendix A of Barrick’s Technical Report dated March 31, 2011, specifically including:

108 TESORO TRES 1 AL 30
109 TESORO CUATRO 1 AL 30
110 TESORO SETS 1 AL 20
111 TESORO DIEZ 1 AL 20
112 TESORO ONCE 1 AL 20

These assertions of Barrick’s ownership of the Tesoro Concessions are manifestly false. The Tesoro Concessions are in fact owned by “Hector Unda Llanos”, not Barrick. There is no notation of Barrick’s interest in the Tesoro Concessions in the margins of the Tesoro Concessions’ titles.

Moreover, the Tesoro Concessions have been encumbered with a Court-Ordered Injunction (the “Injunction”) continuously since 2001, in a Chilean legal action having case No. C-1912-2001 (Villar-Compania) in the 14th Civil Court of Santiago; we are certain Barrick is aware of both the legal action and the referenced Injunction. The Injunction prohibits, inter alia, the sale, contracting, encumbering or commercial exploitation of the Tesoro Concessions, including the minerals contained therein.

As regarding the Amarillos 1-3000 concessions (“Amarillo Concessions”) which are super-positioned with the Tesoro Concessions, our client’s Chilean mining expert, Catalino Albanez, advises that the Amarillo Concessions are non-metallic (salts and nitrates) concessions, and as such cannot support exploitation of the metallic (gold, silver and copper) mining Project. Notwithstanding this inability of the Amarillo Concessions to support the Project, the Amarillo Concessions are included in Barrick’s Project Technical Report and in the Pascua Lama Protocol, as published on page 8 of the “Diario Oficial de la Republica de Chile”.

Both the Tesoro Concessions and the Amarillo concessions are effectively super- positioned with the Amarillo Norte and Amarillo Sur concessions (“Restituted Amarillo”), which constitutes a portion of the mining concessions in which our client, Mountainstar Gold Inc., has obtained certain rights. These rights are set out in the Option Agreement filed on SEDAR May 28, 2012 (the “Option Agreement”).

Barrick’s improper inclusion of the Tesoro Concessions and the Amarillo Concessions in the Project Technical Report and related publications is interfering with our client’s ability to carry on its business described in the Option Agreement and accordingly, we hereby demand on behalf of our client that Barrick (and its employees and representatives) immediately cease and desist from repeating allegations of this nature. Mountainstar Gold Inc. takes its reputation extremely seriously and will take all necessary steps to protect that reputation. This includes, without limitation, commencing proceedings against Barrick for defamation and slander of title and/or filing a complaint with the applicable securities commissions. In any such proceedings Mountainstar will seek substantial damages, including general, aggravated, and punitive damages and Mountainstar reserves the right to share this letter with the applicable securities
commissions.

Yours truly,
[signed by legal counsel]