BUXTON RESOURCES LIMITED — Capital/Financing Update 2018

May 14, 2018

15[th] May 2018

ASX Release

==> picture [252 x 80] intentionally omitted <==

WEST KIMBERLEY EXPLORATION UPDATE

• Ground geophysics at Merlin underway; the moving-loop electromagnetic (MLTEM) survey has begun, gravity survey commencing this week

• Drilling to begin on completion of geophysical surveys

• Re-sampling of DMDD0014 yields results up to 7.11% Ni, 0.19% Co

• Evaluation of Merlin data from 2017 emphatically reinforces Ruins Dolerite potential for large Ni-Cu-Co magmatic deposits

• Buxton has leveraged first-mover status to assemble a belt-scale tenement holding of 824 km[2] along 250 km of strike extent

Buxton Resources Limited (ASX:BUX) is pleased to provide an update for its 100% owned nickel-copper-cobalt projects (including flagship Merlin prospect, Double Magic Project) in the West Kimberley region of Western Australia (see Figure 4 at the end of this document for locations).

A definitive end to the 2017/18 Wet season has enabled light vehicle access to Merlin seven weeks earlier than in 2017. The MLTEM field crew arrived on-site late last week, with data acquisition now well underway. The gravity survey crew will arrive in the next few days.

With the majority of the geophysical programs undertaken so far at Merlin being on hilly/outcropping geology, these surveys are the first on ground geophysical surveys where the highly prospective geology is under shallow cover. Flatter topography enables the first use of MLTEM at Merlin. This is also the first ground gravity survey on Buxton’s tenure in the region.

Finalised survey results are expected mid-June, by which time heavy truck/drill rig access to site should be possible. Drilling will then commence, initially following up on the game-changing intersection of primary brecciated massive sulphide in the last hole of 2017 (DMDD0014, ASX 1/11/17). See Figure 1 below for a view of that breccia in sawn half-core.

==> picture [462 x 156] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

63 mm
----- End of picture text -----

Figure 1. Primary brecciation of massive sulphide seen in DMDD0014 (318.40-318.60m down-hole, Conductor J). Sulphides here are mostly pyrrhotite, pentlandite, and chalcopyrite. Darker fragments of Ruins Dolerite rocks from the sulphide footwall are clearly visible. Sawn HQ half-core shown (63mm across)

PO Box 9028 Suite 1, First Floor Tel: 08-9380 6063 Subiaco WA 6008 14-16 Rowland Street Fax: 08-9381 4056 Subiaco WA 6008

www.buxtonresources.com.au info@buxtonresources.com.au

==> picture [228 x 71] intentionally omitted <==

DRILL TARGETING

At the end of the 2017 drilling program, a step-out hole into previously untested ground (DMDD0014) intersected the second well-developed magmatic sulphide accumulation so far identified at Merlin (Conductor J, ASX 1/11/2017). Lying 450 metres south-east of the 2015 discovery at Conductor D, the new intersection lies around 319 metres down-hole, and includes familiar primary orthomagmatic “net” or leopard-textured sulphide as well as, more significantly, brecciated massive sulphide (see Figure 1). Confirmation of primary magmatic brecciation of sulphides is a game-changer in terms of genesis and prospectivity at Merlin.

Conductor J (intersected by drill hole DMDD014) contains the first primary brecciation of magmatic sulphides ever observed in the Ruins Dolerite and confirms that forceful injection or re-working of sulphides in a high-energy magmatic environment has occurred at Merlin. High energy processes like this are an essential part of systems capable of forming large, high-grade magmatic sulphide deposits. See Figure 2 below for a simple schematic summary of the magmatic system we may be seeing at Merlin.

==> picture [463 x 307] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2. Simple schematic geological sectional summary of genetic features and possible exploration vectors at Merlin, facing north

The location of this high-energy, brecciated Conductor J is also significant. Looking west, there are non-brecciated massive sulphides 450 m away (the original Conductor D discovery) also with leopard-textured sulphides, but which appear to then grade out into disseminated, possibly more distal sulphides still further to the west. Conductor J therefore is the third piece of the puzzle indicating that magmatic system energy increases eastwards and/or down-dip, See Figure 3 below for a Simplified Geology Plan illustrating this point. That in turn suggests that a conduit (also called a feeder), the highest-energy and most prospective part of these magmatic systems, may also lie in that direction.

==> picture [463 x 249] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 3. Simple schematic geological plan summary of genetic features and possible direction of increasing magmatic activity providing exploration vectors at Merlin

DMDD014 RE-SAMPLING

Initial sampling of DMDD0014 was on 0.4 to 1.25m intervals but as part of a metal tenor study, more detailed sampling tied to sulphide abundance was completed (see Table 1 below). Whilst the re-sampled intervals are short, the high grades, high tenor and textures have major positive implications for the potential of Merlin, as well as for the Ruins Dolerite generally.

Table 1. Re-sampled assay results from DMDD0014. Widths are down-hole metres.

Hole ID	From(m)	To(m)	Width(m)	Ni %	Cu %	Co %	S %
DMDD0014	318.35	318.41	0.06	2.84	0.42	0.08	12.24
DMDD0014	318.41	318.51	0.10	5.62	0.21	0.15	22.03
DMDD0014	318.51	318.59	0.08	7.11	0.07	0.19	30.17
DMDD0014	318.59	318.73	0.14	0.95	0.24	0.03	4.39
DMDD0014	318.73	318.78	0.05	6.04	0.15	0.16	28.53
DMDD0014	318.78	318.93	0.15	1.22	1.44	0.04	5.98
DMDD0014	318.93	319.24	0.31	0.60	0.10	0.02	3.10
DMDD0014	319.24	319.32	0.08	5.22	0.09	0.14	23.82
DMDD0014	319.32	319.46	0.14	0.13	0.03	0.01	0.54
DMDD0014	319.46	319.52	0.06	5.52	0.12	0.16	23.36

The high nickel tenor, classic magmatic association between nickel and cobalt, and variations in copper content, are evident in these assays. Sulphur grades are included here for context, a piece of 100% pure massive sulphide for example would assay 34%-36% sulphur.

For all these reasons, Buxton regards DMDD0014 as the most important hole yet drilled at Merlin and in the West Kimberley generally. Extensional drilling along strike and down-dip from DMDD0014 is the focus of initial work in 2018.

==> picture [228 x 71] intentionally omitted <==

TECHNICAL ENCOURAGEMENT FROM MERLIN

Results to date at Merlin, particularly from 2017 drilling, have repeatedly and emphatically confirmed Buxton’s original identification of a prospective Ni-Cu-Co magmatic system.

Rigorous technical studies specifically around likely genesis have been undertaken by Buxton since 2015. Genesis is critical as without particular key criteria fulfilled, potential for economic magmatic deposits, or indeed any sulphides at all, can be low. Understanding the nature of a magmatic system can also help identify exploration vectors towards the most promising targets.

In the event, every piece of work completed has added support for Buxton’s initial interpretation. This work, peer reviews, academic studies and international benchmarking all confirm that a primary orthomagmatic tholeiitic intrusion-hosted (chonolith/conduit) type Ni-Cu-Co-PGE sulphide mineralising system is present at Merlin.

This confirmation establishes the Ruins Dolerite and the West Kimberley generally as a de-risked, fertile and un-explored new Ni-Cu-Co province.

==> picture [462 x 318] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 4. Buxton’s West Kimberley granted and pending tenements over interpreted bedrock geology (GSWA 1:500,000). Granted regional tenements in red, pending in blue, Merlin group in yellow.

With fieldwork already underway at Merlin, Buxton looks forward to updating the market regularly as the season progresses.

For further information, please contact:

==> picture [228 x 71] intentionally omitted <==

Eamon Hannon Sam Wright Managing Director Company Secretary ehannon@buxtonresources.com.au sam@buxtonresources.com.au

Competent Persons

The information in this report that relates to Exploration Results is based is based on information compiled by Mr Derek Marshall, Member of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists, and Mr Eamon Hannon, Fellow of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. Mr Marshall and Mr Hannon are full-time employees of Buxton Resources Limited. Mr Marshall and Mr Hannon have sufficient experience which is relevant to the activity being undertaken to qualify as a “Competent Person”, as defined in the 2012 edition of the Joint Ore Reserves Committee (JORC) Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves. Mr Marshall and Mr Hannon consent to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on their information in the form and context in which it appears.

JORC Table: Section 1 – Sampling Techniques and Data

==> picture [228 x 71] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Sampling techniques	Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down-hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling.	Exploration drilling at the Double Magic project has been undertaken utilizing Reverse Circulation Percussion (RC) rigs, and HQ diamond core wireline rigs equipped with core orientation equipment. The drill-hole locations are picked up by handheld GPS. Previous drill programs holes have been surveyed by licensed surveyors with DGPS. Sampling was carried out under Buxton protocols and QAQC procedures are per industry best practice. RC drilling was sampled on 1m intervals. A rig mounted cyclone and cone splitter was used to provide a bulk sample and a representative split sample for assay. Core sample lengths vary up to 1.67 metres, quarter HQ core submitted for analysis. Samples have been submitted to Intertek Genalysis in Perth for analysis. A standard dry, crush and pulverize was followed by a four-acid digestion finished with ICP- MS for a suite of 48 elements. Samples from the 2018 re-sampling of DMDD0014 were already-sawn quarter HQ core submitted for the same 4A/ICP-MS 48 element analysis, however 1 sample was prepped as a 25g charge and also analysed for low-level PGEs and Au.
	Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used.
	Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public Report. In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this would be relatively simple (eg ‘reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fire assay’). In other cases more explanation may be required, such as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (eg submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information.
Drilling techniques	Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc).	The 2017 drilling program was drilled By Core Drilling. Reverse Circulation drilling was using a Schramm T685 drilling rig with Auxiliary and Booster using a 150mm face hammer. Diamond drilling was using an EDM 2000 truck mounted rig, drilling HQ2 core from surface. RC hole DMRC0035 was extended with NQ core. All core orientated using a TruCore orientation device on each drill run. All drill holes have been downhole gyro surveyed to determine accurate hole trajectories.
Drill sample recovery	Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed.	The RC ‘s sample recovery and moisture are routinely recorded. All samples show good recovery and are dry. It is not believed that any bias has occurred due to loss or gain of sample. All core was measured on-site, recoveries calculated and reconciled with driller’s plods.
	Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples.
	Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse material.
Logging	Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies.	All drill holes are geologically logged on-site in real time by qualified and experienced geologists, recording relevant data to a set template. All logging included lithological features, mineral assemblages and estimated mineralisation percentages. All data was codified to a set of company code systems. All core is orientated, RQD logged, all structural data measured and recorded. All chips and core are photographed.
	Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. _Core(or costean, channel, etc) photography. _
	The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged.
Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation	If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken.	All RC 1m intervals were split with a rig mounted cone splitter. All HQ core was sawn at a constant angle to orientation markings, sampled on even metres or to geological boundaries, up to a maximum of 1.67 metres in length. Quarter core submitted for assay. Sample preparation is consistent with industry best practice. Field QC procedures involved the use of certified reference material assay standards, blanks and duplicates for company QC measures, and laboratory standards, replicate assaying and barren washes for laboratory QC measures. The insertion rate of each of these QAQC measures averaged 1:20. The sample size is deemed appropriate for the material and analysis method.
	If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry.
	For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the samplepreparation technique.
	Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to maximise representivity of samples.
	Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in situ material collected, including for instance results for field duplicate/second-half sampling.

	Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled.
Quality of assay data and laboratory tests	The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total.	The exploration samples will be analysed at Intertek Genalysis in Perth, Australia. Sample preparation included drying, crushing, splitting and pulverizing. A four acid digest followed by a 48 element MS. Previous drill used a 4 acid digest with an OE finish and a 25 g fire assay for Pt and Pd. Metallurgical flotation testing was carried out by ALS on three 12 kg samples on ¼ and or ½ core from the 2015 drilling. Core was crushed and ground to 106um with natural pH with excess collector Sodium Ethyl Xanthate (SEX) and A3477 with MIBC (frother) added as froth stability required. The laboratories procedures are considered to be appropriate for reporting according to industry best practice.
	For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc.	Not applicable.
	Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established.	Not applicable.
Verification of sampling and assaying	The verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative company personnel.	Significant mineralisation has been verified by consultants and alternative company personnel.
	The use of twinned holes.	Two RC holes from the 2015 drill program (DMRC0003 and 17) have been twinned by HQ diamond core holes DMDD0001 and 2 respectively, confirming mineralisation in both cases. Core has been logged but not sawn for samplingasgeological work is ongoing.
	Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols.	All data is collected initially on paper and handheld GPS. This data is hand entered to spread sheets and validated by Company geologists. This data is then imported into the company database and extra validation is carried out. Physical data sheets are stored at the company office. Digital data is securelyarchived on and off-site.
	Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	No adjustments to assay data have been made.
Location of data points	Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation.	Handheld GPS (+/-5m) as well as reference to topographical and remote sensing data. Drillhole collars from the 2015 drill program were pickup by licensed surveyor.
	Specification of thegrid system used.	MGA51(GDA94).
	Quality and adequacy of topographic control.	A DEM (digital terrain model) was created from the altimeter data from the aerial magnetic survey and is deemed sufficient for this stage of exploration.
Data spacing and distribution	Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.	The coming drill program is reconnaissance and step out from the 2017 drilling program, spacing is deemed appropriate for this stage of exploration. Not applicable – No Mineral Resource or Ore Reserve calculations have been performed. The 2015 drilling had some RC composite samples taken in non mineralised material into 2 or 4 metre composites from one metre bags using a spear. No sample compositing took place in 2017 drilling. Metallurgical samples were composite samples from drill core.
	Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimationprocedure(s) and classifications applied.
	Whether sample compositing has been applied.
Orientation of data in relation to geological structure	Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type.	Information from orientated core indicates that drillhole orientation is appropriate for disseminated and massive matrix mineralisation. All mineralised intervals are down hole intervals, not true width.
	If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures is considered

		Samples were packaged and stored in secure storage from the time of gathering through to submission. Laboratory best practice methods were employed by the laboratory upon receipt. Returned pulps will be stored at a secure companywarehouse. No audits of the sampling techniques or data were carried out due to the early stage of exploration. It is considered by the Company that industry best practice methods have been employed at all stages of the exploration.
	to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.
Sample security	The measures taken to ensure sample security.	Samples were packaged and stored in secure storage from the time of gathering through to submission. Laboratory best practice methods were employed by the laboratory upon receipt. Returned pulps will be stored at a secure companywarehouse.
Audits or reviews	The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.	No audits of the sampling techniques or data were carried out due to the early stage of exploration. It is considered by the Company that industry best practice methods have been employed at all stages of the exploration.

JORC Table: Section 2 – Reporting of Exploration Results

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Mineral tenement and land tenure status	Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental settings.	The West Kimberley Ni-Cu-Co Project is located in the Kimberley region of Western Australia and consists of 11 granted exploration licences (EL), 1 granted prospecting licence (PL), 4 pending ELs and held in the names of Alexander Creek Pty Ltd and Buxton Resources Limited. Alexander Creek Pty Ltd is a wholly (100%) owned subsidiary of Buxton Resources Limited. This regional project is subdivided into project areas as follows; The Double Magic Project comprises 7 granted ELs (E04/1533, E04/2026, E04/2142, E04/2060, E04/2466, E04/2467, E04/2469) and 1 pending EL (E04/2468) all held by Alexander Creek Pty Ltd. Additionally, 1 granted PL (P04/269) is held in the name of Buxton Resources. The Sentinel Project consists of 1 granted EL (E04/2408) and 1 pending EL (E04/2527) held in the name of Buxton Resources Limited. The Ruins Project consists of 1 granted EL (E04/2480) held in the name of Buxton Resources. The remaining 2 granted ELs (E04/2407 & E04/2411) and 2 pending Els (E04/2406 & E04/2530) all held by Buxton Resources, are either wholly or partially within the Yampi Sound (Defence) Training Area. Access agreements are required with relevant government agencies prior to land access.
	The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area.	The tenements are in good standing with DMIRS and there are no known impediments for exploration on these tenements.
Exploration done by other parties	Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.	The Double Magic Project area (previously referred to as the Alexander Creek Project, Clara Hills, Jack’s Hill, Limestone Springs & Maura’s Reward) has been collected by numerous exploration parties, including Alexander Creek Pty Ltd, Victory Mines Limited (ASX:VIC), Proto Resources and Investments Limited (ASX:PRW), and Ram Resources Limited (ASX:RMR). All geophysical data has been independently reviewed by Southern Geoscience Consultants. All historical data presented has been previously reported under JORC 2004 and there has been no material change. There has been limited modern exploration elsewhere in Project areas. Historical work was mainly completed by Pickands Mather and Company International, Western Mining Corporation and government geological agencies.
Geology	Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	Known mineralisation at the Double Magic Project is considered to be primary orthomagmatic intrusion related Ni-Cu-Co sulphide.

		The Project areas lie within the Palaeoproterozoic Hooper Province of the King Leopold Orogen in the Kimberley region of Western Australia. The geology of the Project is characterized by a thick turbiditic meta- sediments and silicic volcanics of the Marboo Formation which are intruded the Ruins Dolerite. The Ruins Dolerite is a medium- to fine-grained mafic- ultramafic intrusive that is host to the known nickel- copper sulphide mineralization. This mineralization is interpreted to represent primary orthomagmatic sulphide mineralization, however there appears to be minor re-mobilisation and alteration of the mineralization inplaces.
Drill hole Information	A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for all Material drill holes:	No new drill hole information is presented in this release. Details of the re-sampled hole (DMDD0014) have been previously reported
	o_easting and northing of the drill hole collar_
	o_elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea_ level in metres) of the drill hole collar
	o_dip and azimuth of the hole_
	o_down hole length and interception depth_
	o_hole length_
	If the exclusion of this information is justified on the basis that the information is not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearly explain why this is the case.
Data aggregation methods	In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated.	No weighting, truncations, aggregates or metal equivalents were used.
	Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail.
	The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values should be clearly stated.
Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths	These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Exploration Results.	Due to the locally complex geometry of high-grade zones observed in orientated drill core (particularly remobilised massive sulphides) true widths of intersections are difficult to determine with full confidence. Any true width estimates provided represent the best possible estimate, based on gross orientation of mineralised zones as interpreted from drilling, geophysical data, and surface mapping
	If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported.
	If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this effect (eg ‘down hole length, true width not known’).
Diagrams	Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being reported. These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views.	No new drill hole information is presented in this release. New assay data from DMDD0014 is tabulated
Balanced reporting	Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of Exploration Results.	All currently available exploration results have previously been reported.
Other substantive exploration data	Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances.	There is no other exploration data that is deemed to be meaningful or material.

	Further work	The nature and scale of planned further work (eg tests for	See text in body of release.
		lateral extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-
		out drilling).
		Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible	Regionally, the extensive land package containing
		extensions, including the main geological interpretations	significant exposure of the nickeliferous host Ruins
		and future drilling areas, provided this information is not	Dolerite are of exploration interest.
		commercially sensitive.