By 
Sino Metals Leach Zambia Limited has filed a countersuit against environmental consultancy Drizit Zambia Limited, accusing the firm of fraudulent and illegal conduct and demanding US$871,800 in repayment under their Assessment Contract.
The countersuit escalates a legal dispute linked to the February 2025 tailings dam spill in Chambishi, which released acidic effluent into the Kafue River and surrounding farmland.
According to court filings, Sino Metals alleges that Drizit misrepresented its qualifications to conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), submitted inaccurate reports, and fabricated information — including the existence of a so-called “hot zone” — prior to being engaged.
The mining firm further accuses Drizit of gross incompetence, citing repeated failures to adhere to EIA methodologies, misidentification of pollution control dams, incorrect application of soil and water standards, and submission of unsupported and speculative recommendations.
Sino Metals also claims Drizit breached confidentiality by publicly releasing unapproved reports and a letter dated June 3, 2025, which allegedly caused reputational harm, regulatory scrutiny, and multiple lawsuits.
The company is seeking repayment of US$871,800, interest, general and punitive damages, and legal costs.
“Drizit’s actions were deliberate and reckless, going far beyond negligence. The unauthorized disclosure of reports harmed our reputation and forced us into costly legal action,” Sino Metals stated in its court documents.
The countersuit follows a separate US$3.48 million lawsuit filed by Drizit against Sino Metals and the Zambia Environmental Management Agency (ZEMA), in which Drizit accuses the mining firm of negligence, bad faith, and withholding payments after the tailings spill.
Drizit claims it was penalised for recommending that an area near the tailings dam be declared a “hot zone” due to dangerously high contamination levels.
“Despite completing all required assessments and reports, Sino Metals terminated our contract unlawfully and withheld payments,” Drizit stated in its claim.
Sino Metals, however, argues that Drizit ignored repeated instructions to correct errors, failed to properly characterise contamination sources, and submitted inaccurate Preliminary Contamination Reports — actions it says amount to fraudulent and negligent misrepresentation, rendering the contract void.
WARNING! All rights reserved. This material, and other digital content on this website, may not be reproduced, published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed in whole or in part without prior express permission from ZAMBIA MONITOR.
Comments