Navigating Legal Crosscurrents: Why Seabridge Gold's KSM Project Remains on Track Amid Tudor Gold's Appeal

The KSM Project, one of the world's largest undeveloped gold-silver-copper deposits, has long been a focal point for investors in the mining sector. With a feasibility study estimating reserves of 34.4 million ounces of gold, 69.4 million ounces of silver, and 3.3 billion pounds of copper, its success hinges on overcoming regulatory and legal hurdles. Among the most recent challenges is Tudor Gold Corp.'s appeal of a British Columbia Supreme Court decision regarding the Mitchell Treaty Tunnels (MTT) and the Conditional Mineral Reserve (CMR). While this legal battle adds a layer of complexity, a closer look reveals that Tudor's arguments face significant headwinds, making the appeal a strategic risk with limited material impact on Seabridge's long-term prospects.

The Tudor Gold Appeal: A Legal Stand Against Established Precedent

At the heart of the dispute lies the CMR, a regulatory tool that prohibits Tudor and other free miners from interfering with the MTT's construction or operation. The British Columbia Chief Gold Commissioner (CGC) recently affirmed the CMR's validity in a ruling that dismissed Tudor's bid to exempt itself from the reserve or cancel it entirely. Tudor's appeal argues that Seabridge's Licence of Occupation for the MTT creates competing mineral rights—a claim Seabridge refutes, emphasizing that its rights are confined to infrastructure access, not mineral claims over Tudor's Treaty Creek Project.

The CMR's legal foundation is robust. As noted in the research, it has been upheld by the Ministry of Mines in 2014, early 2024, and April 2025, with the CGC's latest decision reaffirming its applicability. Legal experts highlight that Tudor's position runs counter to well-established principles distinguishing infrastructure rights from mineral claims. While courts occasionally revisit such decisions, the cumulative weight of prior rulings strongly favors Seabridge.

Potential Outcomes and Their Implications

If Tudor were to prevail—a scenario deemed improbable by analysts—the court might order the CGC to reconsider its decision. Even then, the CMR would remain in effect during the reevaluation, leaving the project's infrastructure plans largely unaffected. A more critical risk is if the court rules the CMR does not apply to Tudor, which could open a path for interference. However, this outcome would require overturning multiple prior approvals, a high bar given the CGC's consistent stance.

Seabridge's confidence in the appeal's dismissal is tempered by standard risk disclosures, but the company's actions reflect certainty: it continues advancing the project, including preparing for potential construction once permits are finalized.

The "Substantially Started" Status: A Parallel Legal Battle

While the Tudor appeal garners attention, an equally critical challenge involves the KSM Project's "substantially started" (SS) status, granted in July 2024 to prevent the Environmental Assessment Certificate from expiring. Opponents are contesting this designation in court, with a hearing set for late September 2025.

The SS status is a procedural safeguard, and its validity hinges on whether Seabridge and the BC government demonstrated sufficient progress to meet legal thresholds. Historical precedent suggests such designations are rarely overturned unless procedural flaws are evident. Seabridge and the government have already filed responses defending their compliance with regulatory requirements, and the SS status remains in effect until the court rules otherwise.

Investment Implications: Risks vs. Reward

For investors, the key question is whether these legal challenges justify caution or present an opportunity. While the Tudor appeal and SS status hearing introduce short-term uncertainty, the structural advantages of the KSM Project remain intact:

1. Strong Legal Precedent: The CMR's repeated validation reduces the likelihood of a seismic shift in the court's favor.
2. Project Momentum: Seabridge has invested heavily in securing permits and community partnerships, which are harder to unwind than legal rulings.
3. Market Dynamics: Gold prices and long-term demand for base metals underpin the project's economic viability.

Investors should monitor the stock's reaction to legal updates. A dip following the Tudor appeal or SS hearing could present a buying opportunity, especially if the fundamentals of the project—its scale, resource quality, and strategic importance—remain unchallenged.

Conclusion: Focus on the Horizon

Legal battles are a routine part of large-scale resource projects, and the KSM Project's significance ensures Seabridge will defend its interests vigorously. While Tudor's appeal and the SS status challenge warrant attention, their potential impact pales against the project's multi-decade timeline and multi-billion-dollar potential. For investors with a long-term horizon, the risks are manageable, and the rewards—once the project moves into construction—could be substantial.

In the words of the market: buy the rumor, sell the news—or in this case, buy the noise while holding onto the signal of a project poised to redefine Seabridge's valuation.