IRON BEAR RESOURCES LTD — Capital/Financing Update 2018

Nov 29, 2018

ASX Announcement 30 November 2018

Market Update – Kipushi Tailings Projects

Highlights

• Assays from Tailings drilling imminent;

• Discussions with Financiers and Offtakers continuing; and

• Funded EPCM contract in discussion.

Australian resources and investment company, Cape Lambert Resources Limited (ASX: CFE ) ( Cape Lambert or the Company ) is pleased to provide an update on the progress of the Kipushi Cobalt-Copper Tailings Project ( Kipushi Project ) in the Democratic Republic of Congo ( DRC ).

The Kipushi Project, located near the town of Kipushi approximately 25km from Lubumbashi, refer Figure 1, involves the reprocessing of cobaltcopper tailings contained in the Kipushi Tailings Storage Facility ( Kipushi TSF ) and is operated by Soludo Lambert Mining SAS ( Soludo Lambert ), under a 50/50 joint venture arrangement between local entity Paragon Mining SARL ( Paragon ) and Cape Lambert. Paragon has a 70% interest in the Kipushi Project via a contract with La Patience SPRL that gives it the right to exploit and process the tailings from the Kipushi TSF and sell the product.

Cape Lambert Resources Limited (ASX: CFE) is a mineral exploration and development company with a diverse portfolio and exposure to cobalt, copper, iron ore, lithium, gold, uranium and lead-silver-zinc assets in Australia, Europe, Africa and South America.

Australian Securities Exchange

Code: CFE

Ordinary shares 1,011,734,914

Unlisted Options 15,336,363 ($0.07 exp 12 Mar 2020) 7,667,727 ($0.07 exp 19 Mar 2020) 5,250,000 ($0.04 exp 31 Mar 2020)

Board of Directors

Tony Sage Executive Chairman

Tim Turner Non-executive Director

Stefan Müller Non-executive Director

Melissa Chapman Company Secretary

Early October 2018 drilling contractor, Solutions for Africa, completed 47 holes for a total of 432m. Samples were dispatched to the laboratory of ALS in Lubumbashi for assay with the results expected in the coming week. Once received, work will commence on preparing the Mineral Resource estimation for the tailings dam.

Preliminary work has been completed to create a three dimensional volume model of the tailings using surveyed topography and depths to base of tailings obtained from recent drilling. In the area drilled, this work has indicated a potential volume in the order of 2.8 million cubic metres of tailings contained. The area drilled only represents a subset of the total tailed area and has already indicated a volume greater than what was expected in overall. In-situ dry density test work is still to be completed which will allow a total tonnage calculation however an initial estimation of tonnage can be determined using a conservative density range of 1.5 t/m3 – 2.0 t/m3 (expected dry SG for copper cobalt quartz sand is >2.0 t/m3) resulting in a potential tonnage of tailings in the range of 4.2 Mt – 5.6 Mt. This potential volume is conceptual in nature and there has been insufficient exploration to determine accurate tonnage or data received to enable estimation of a mineral resource. It is uncertain if further exploration will result in the estimation of a mineral resource.

Cape Lambert Contact

Investor Relations Phone: +61 8 9380 9555 Email: info@capelam.com.au

www.capelam.com.au

Cape Lambert Resources Limited ABN 71 095 047 920

Corporate - 32 Harrogate Street, West Leederville WA 6007

==> picture [595 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

Discussions with several potential project financiers have progressed as well as discussions with a major party for an offtake agreement for the cobalt hydroxide product (produced through a leach process).

The Company has also been approached by an Engineering, Procurement and Construction Management ( EPCM ) contractor that has offered to fund and build the Project, with the cost being repaid from production revenue. Discussions with this company are progressing with a firm costed proposal awaited.

Commenting on the progress so far, Chairman Tony Sage said “I am confident that financing and offtake agreements can be finalised in the very near future. I am also encouraged by the offer received for an EPCM contractor to fund the building of the leaching plant, which presents an alternative option to getting into production, so I look forward to receiving their proposal”.

Yours faithfully Cape Lambert Resources Limited

Tony Sage Executive Chairman

Competent Persons Statement

The information in this report that relates to Exploration Results is based on information compiled by Mr Olaf Frederickson. Mr Frederickson is a Member of The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (AusIMM) and has sufficient experience relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which they are undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves (the “JORC Code”). Mr Frederickson is a consultant to Cape Lambert Resources. Mr Frederickson consents to the inclusion in the report of the Exploration Results in the form and context in which they appear.

==> picture [446 x 224] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1: Kipushi location map

Cape Lambert Resources Limited ASX: CFE

Page 2 of 8

==> picture [595 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [461 x 326] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2: Drill Hole Locations overlain with volume model in blue.

==> picture [595 x 280] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 3: 3D image of volume model.

Cape Lambert Resources Limited ASX: CFE

Page 3 of 8

ASX Announcement 30 November 2018

JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1 Kipushi Tailings Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

(Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections.)

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	Sampling	• Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or	•Auger drilling used to take vertical samples.
	techniques	specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma	•Samples of varying length taken downhole dependent on auger penetration.
		sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should	•Samples were collected in plastics and placed into calico bags.
		not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling.	•Samples have been dried and sent to ALS for sample prep and
		• Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity	analysis.
		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	• Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air	•Drilling conducted by auger with a shaft length of 1.4m and diameter
	techniques	blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other	of approximately 20 cm. •Dead stick technique employed.
		_type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc). _
	Drill sample	• Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries	•Sand sample removed manually from the auger flights and collected
	recovery	and results assessed. • Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure	as a single sample for each length of auger penetration.
		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	•Samples were logged for colour, grain size, moisture, clay content.
		geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate	•Logging was qualitative.
		Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical
		studies.

Cape Lambert Resources Limited ASX: CFE

Page 4 of 8

ASX Announcement 30 November 2018

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	• Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or
	costean, channel, etc) photography.
	• The total length andpercentage of the relevant intersections logged.
Sub-	• If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core	•All samples were partially wet but were competent to the touch. The
sampling techniques and sample preparation	taken. • 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 sample preparation technique.	material was in the form of stratigraphically layered non saturated tailings of fairly uniform consistency.
	• 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	• The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and	•Samples sent to ALS lab.
assay data and laboratory tests	laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total. • 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	•Results pending.
	derivation, etc.
	• Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks,
	duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels
	of accuracy (ie lack of bias) andprecision have been established.
Verification	• The verification of significant intersections by either independent or	•No verification work has been conducted.
of sampling and assaying	alternative company personnel. • The use of twinned holes. • Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols.	•Test pits alongside some drilled holes have been used in place of twinned holes. •Results pending.
	• Discuss any adjustment to assay data.
Location of	• Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and	•Drill holes were located with handheld GPS.
data points	down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation.
	• Specification of thegrid system used.

Cape Lambert Resources Limited ASX: CFE

Page 5 of 8

ASX Announcement 30 November 2018

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	• Quality and adequacy of topographic control.
Data	• Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.	•Samples were taken according to auger penetration.
spacing and distribution	• 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 estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied.	•Drill holes were planned on a nominal 75m x 75m diamond grid. •Some holes were in accessible due to ground conditions •Samples were not composited.
	• Whether sample compositing has been applied.
Orientation	• Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of	•No particular geological structure is evident in the tailings
of data in	possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering
relation to geological structure	the deposit type. • If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.
Sample	• The measures taken to ensure sample security.	•Sample chain of custody was maintained by the geologist throughout
security		delivery to their place of storage.
Audits or	• The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.	•No audits or reviews have been done.
reviews

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

(Criteria listed in the preceding section also apply to this section.)

	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
	Mineral	• Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including	•Work was conducted on PER 12347 in the Kipushi Tailings area of
	tenement	agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint	southern DRC.
	and land tenure status	ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental settings. • The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any	•The licence is reportedly held by state owned company Gecamines and is the subject of a rights agreement between Gecamines and Paragon SARL and a proposed joint venture agreement between Paragon SARL and Cape Lambert Resources.
		known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area.	•Details of tenure are to be confirmed as part of the due diligence.
	Exploration	• Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.	•No known exploration has been conducted on the tailings.
	done by		•Historical plant records have been requested.

Cape Lambert Resources Limited ASX: CFE

Page 6 of 8

ASX Announcement 30 November 2018

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
other
parties
Geology	• Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	•Post processing tailings.
Drill hole	• A summary of all information material to the understanding of the	•Pending receipt of assay results.
Information	exploration results including a tabulation of the following information
	for all Material drill holes:
	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	• In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques,	•Results pending.
aggregatio n methods	maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated. • 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.
Relationshi	• These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of	•Samples were taken vertically.
p between mineralisati on widths and	Exploration Results. • 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	•The base of the tailings was intersected in all but 1 holes.
intercept	width not known’).
lengths

Cape Lambert Resources Limited ASX: CFE

Page 7 of 8

ASX Announcement 30 November 2018

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Diagrams	• Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of	•See attached location plan.
	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.
Balanced	• Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not	•All results have been reported
reporting	practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of
	Exploration Results.
Other	• Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported	•N/A
substantive	including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical
exploration data	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.
Further	• The nature and scale of planned further work (eg tests for lateral	•Additional drilling will be completed as required.
work	extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling).	•Further work to determine in-situ SG to be conducted shortly.
	• Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions,
	including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas,
	provided this information is not commercially sensitive.

Cape Lambert Resources Limited ASX: CFE

Page 8 of 8