SINO METALS SUES DRIZIT OVER ALLEGED FRAUD AND FAKE EIA LICENCE

SINO METALS SUES DRIZIT OVER ALLEGED FRAUD AND FAKE EIA LICENCE

Breaking News spot

Posted by admin on October 20, 2025 at 1:41 PM

Share: Visits: 707


A high-stakes legal battle has erupted between Sino Metals Leach Zambia Limited and Drizit Environmental Consultants, with Sino Metals filing a countersuit demanding USD 8.62 million in damages over an allegedly fraudulent Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) agreement.

Filed in the Lusaka High Court on 14 October, the suit accuses Drizit of fraudulent misrepresentation, incompetence, and breach of contract. Sino Metals claims it was misled into signing Contract No. SML 2025-03-07 based on Drizit’s false assertion that it was licensed by the Zambia Environmental Management Agency (ZEMA) to conduct EIA services.

According to court filings, Drizit’s reports were riddled with technical errors, including misidentification of mine infrastructure and failure to meet basic environmental standards. Sino Metals alleges it paid USD 871,800 as a deposit and incurred further costs based on Drizit’s “purported expertise.”

The mining firm further accuses Drizit of breaching confidentiality by publicly releasing unapproved reports and a letter dated 3 June 2025, signed by Drizit Group CEO Doug Carmody. Sino Metals argues that this disclosure caused reputational damage, triggered lawsuits, and invited regulatory scrutiny.

The company is seeking A full refund of payments made, USD 8.62 million in damages for business losses, A declaration that the contract is void for illegality, Compensation for fraudulent misrepresentation, breach of confidentiality, and reputational harm and Punitive damages to deter similar conduct

This legal escalation follows earlier tensions over a controversial EIA report linked to a tailings dam spill in Chambishi, which Drizit allegedly publicized without ZEMA approval.

As of publication, Drizit has not publicly responded to the latest allegations. However, in a prior media statement, the firm rejected claims of wrongdoing and defended its role in the environmental assessment process.

 

Related Articles