The case Matiko John v. Barrick Gold Corporation, 2024 ONSC 6240 involves multiple claims against Barrick Gold Corporation concerning alleged injuries and deaths occurring at the North Mara Gold Mine in Tanzania.
Background:
- Plaintiffs allege that violent incidents at the mine caused harm to individuals, asserting that Barrick is responsible due to its oversight and sustainability policies.
- Barrick denies direct responsibility, attributing the violence to actions of the Tanzanian Police Force (TPF), which operates independently under agreements with Barrick’s Tanzanian subsidiaries.
Claims:
- Plaintiffs argue Barrick's global human rights policies implicate it in negligent oversight at the mine.
- Allegations rely on Barrick’s public commitments to human rights and corporate sustainability.
Jurisdictional Challenges:
- Barrick sought dismissal of the Ontario-based claims, citing lack of jurisdiction and asserting Tanzania as the proper forum under the doctrine of forum non conveniens.
- The court concluded:
- While Barrick has a small office in Ontario, the subject matter and events are overwhelmingly connected to Tanzania.
- Witnesses, evidence, and key incidents central to the claim are located in Tanzania.
Forum Non Conveniens:
- The court held Tanzania to be the more appropriate jurisdiction, noting:
- Tanzanian courts operate under an English common-law system.
- Witnesses, including Tanzanian police, cannot be compelled to testify in Ontario.
- Tanzania’s judiciary is deemed competent, fair, and capable of handling the claims.
- Logistical and language barriers in Ontario further supported Tanzania as the better forum.
Outcome:
- The Ontario Superior Court dismissed the claims for lack of jurisdiction and alternatively stated that it would have stayed the actions on forum non conveniens grounds. No monetary award was specified.
