Lawsuit Overview
November 10, 2020 - The case was dismissed by court order.
April 8, 2019 - A consolidated amended complaint was filed.
June 27, 2018 - An investor in shares of Sibanye Gold Limited (NYSE: SBGL) filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York over alleged violations of Federal Securities Laws by Sibanye Gold Limited in connection with certain allegedly false and misleading statements made between April 7, 2017 and June 26, 2018.
South Africa based Sibanye Gold Limited operates as a precious metals mining company in South Africa, Zimbabwe, and the United States. Sibanye Gold Limited reported that its annual Total Revenue rose from 31.24 billion ZAR in 2016 to 45.91 billion ZAR in 2017 and that its Net Income of 3.04 billion ZAR in 2016 turned into a Net Loss of 4.43 billion ZAR in 2017.
On June 26, 2018, it was reported that “another worker was killed at [Sibanye’s] Driefontein operation in South Africa, bringing the total deaths at the company’s mines this year to 21.” According to the article, Sibanye “accounts for nearly half of the 46 people reported killed at South African mines in 2018 and is already the subject of an investigation by the chief inspector of mines.”
Shares of Sibanye Gold Limited (NYSE: SBGL) declined from $20.55 per share in August 2016 to as low as $2.25 per share on June 27, 2018.
According to the complaint the plaintiff alleges on behalf of purchasers of Sibanye Gold Limited (NYSE: SBGL) common shares between April 7, 2017 and June 26, 2018, that the defendants violated Federal Securities Laws. More specifically, the plaintiff claims that between April 7, 2017 and June 26, 2018, the defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that Sibanye Gold Limited’s culture places short-term profits over safety, that consequently, almost half of South Africa’s 2018 mining fatalities occurred in Sibanye Gold Limited mines, and that as a result, defendants’ statements about Sibanye Gold Limited’s business, operations, and prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times.