KUNIKO LIMITED — Capital/Financing Update 2021

Oct 24, 2021

==> picture [216 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

ASX Release

25.10.2021

ASX: KNI

Fast Facts Issued Capital: 56,480,499 Market Cap (@$2.04): $115.22m

High Grade Results from Reconnaissance Sampling

Kuniko Limited (“Kuniko” or “the Company”) is pleased to announce encouraging assay results achieved from historic mine dumps and workings at its battery metals projects and initial field results from its newly acquired Nord-Helgeland Project.

Highlights:

• Assay results from historic mine dumps and workings across the Feøy, Romsås and Skuterud Projects provide confirmation of the potential of these battery metal projects.

• Grades of up to 14.35% Cu and 1.74% Ni obtained from waste pit samples at Karmøy and Feøy.

• Reconnaissance sampling around the pegmatite field of the Nord-Helgeland Project indicates scope for additional exploration to be undertaken.

• Consolidation of new and historic geochemical and geophysics to define drilling targets for 2022 is continuing.

Highlights

Developing Copper, Nickel, Cobalt, and other battery metals projects in Europe, for Europe

Ethical Sourcing ensured . 100% commitment to target a net ZERO CARBON footprint.

Operations in Norway, where 98% of electricity comes from RENEWABLE sources.

Corporate Directory Kuniko Limited ACN 619 314 055

Chief Executive Officer Antony Beckmand

Chairman Gavin Rezos

Non-Executive Director Brendan Borg

Non-Executive Director Maja McGuire

Non-Executive Director Birgit Liodden

Antony Beckmand, CEO, commented:

“These assay results are strongly encouraging, reinforcing our knowledge of the available datasets, and telegraphing the valuable potential of our portfolio of battery metals projects in Norway. Further, there is clear potential for further exploration of the pegmatites in our newly acquired Nord-Helgeland Project which may provide an opportunity to expand our interests into valuable technology metals.

We look forward to soon being able to advise the assay results of our extensive geochemical sampling work at the Skuterud and Vangrøfta Projects, which combined with the recent geophysics and these latest reconnaissance sample assay results, will drive the next stages of exploration for these exciting brown field projects.”

==> picture [15 x 15] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [17 x 16] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [22 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [20 x 21] intentionally omitted <==

Company Secretary Joel Ives

www.kuniko.eu

info@kuniko.eu

@KunikoLtd

Level 11, Brookfield Place, 125 St Georges Terrace Perth WA 6000

+61 8 6364 5095

1

25.10.2021

==> picture [216 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

ASX Release

Reconnaissance Sampling of Historic Mine Dumps and Workings

Reconnaissance sampling of historic mine dumps and workings, carried out in May 2021, has confirmed the presence of base and precious metal mineralisation across the Feøy, Karmøy, Romsås and Skuterud license blocks (Table 1; Figures 2, 3, and 4).

Massive and disseminated sulphide ore mineralisation at Kuniko’s Ni-Cu-PGE projects Feøy and Karmøy, as indicated by historical mining and exploration records, was confirmed with results of up to 14.35% Cu (KAR2105), 2.17% Cu (FEO2104), 0.12% Co (FEO2103) and up to 0.61% Zn (KAR2105) and 1.74%% Ni (FEO2104).

In addition, Feøy samples returned significant PGE assays, including up to 2.64ppm Pt and 4.84ppm Pd (FEO2102) . The sampling also confirmed the style of mineralisation observed in the sites, which were never progressed beyond test site status in previous exploration phases.

In the Romsås area, assays for copper, manganese and particularly nickel also corroborated data from historical mining, both in relative importance of the target metals and in their host associations. Selected samples returned assays of up to 0.3% Cu and 1.01% Ni (ROM2101).

The results provide good corroboration with historical sampling data and confirm the validity of this data for integration with the newly acquired geophysics and soil sampling data.

These analysis results confirm:

• The reliability of Kuniko’s existing database;

• The continuing potential of these areas for further exploration;

• The potential for the presence of additional mineralization types, such as PGE mineralisation.

Figure 1: Massive pyrrhotitepentlanditechalcopyrite ore from the Feøy Mine

==> picture [376 x 282] intentionally omitted <==

2

25.10.2021

==> picture [216 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

ASX Release

Table 1:

Assay Results of Historic Waste Pit Samples

Sample ID	Easting (UTM 32N) Northing (UTM 32N) Au (ppm) Pt (ppm) Pd (ppm) Ag (ppm) Co (ppm) Cr (ppm) Cu (ppm) Mn (ppm) Ni (ppm) S (%)	Cu (%) Ni (%) S (%)
ROM2101	618915 6607454 0,034 0,046 0,052 0,49 834 770 3020 1200 >10000 >10.0 618915 6607454 0,015 0,01 0,009 0,18 163,5 899 1080 1640 2080 2,66 618915 6607454 0,017 0,046 0,036 0,27 611 770 1380 1320 7920 9,6 618915 6607454 0,013 0,237 0,012 0,28 263 1000 1620 1660 3650 4,4 618915 6607454 0,016 0,01 0,008 0,27 138,5 929 996 1650 1710 2,14 618915 6607454 0,015 <0.005 0,008 0,23 118 685 1000 1460 1730 2,43 545836 6455061 0,002 <0.005 0,001 0,02 109 42 335 51 161 2,04 545836 6455061 0,002 <0.005 0,002 0,03 208 61 349 54 115 1,04 545836 6455061 0,002 <0.005 0,001 0,02 31,4 37 358 43 54,4 1,11 545836 6455061 0,002 <0.005 0,001 <0.01 38,3 46 463 46 71,8 1,25 545836 6455061 0,002 <0.005 0,004 0,03 120 34 294 53 124 1,01 286593 6584717 0,078 <0.005 0,002 10,9 30 12 >10000 90 7,9 >10.0 286593 6584717 0,046 <0.005 0,001 7,82 30,5 12 >10000 594 6,2 >10.0 286593 6584717 0,087 <0.005 0,002 19,75 34,4 9 >10000 146 14,9 >10.0 286593 6584717 0,062 <0.005 0,001 7,88 24,5 11 >10000 339 6,6 >10.0 286593 6584717 0,49 <0.005 0,002 26,8 16,1 9 >10000 179 7,5 >10.0 286593 6584717 0,132 <0.005 0,001 14,3 15,3 16 >10000 940 7,3 7,35 286593 6584717 0,151 0,005 0,002 31,3 20,1 10 >10000 916 4,7 9,14 282141 6589525 0,013 1,745 3,52 6,06 985 128 >10000 146 >10000 >10.0 282141 6589525 0,039 2,64 4,84 3,34 1025 19 >10000 256 >10000 >10.0 282141 6589525 0,178 1,645 4,04 4,88 1190 71 >10000 351 >10000 >10.0 282141 6589525 0,186 1,33 4,69 6,76 896 22 >10000 456 >10000 >10.0 285925 6580760 0,01 0,008 0,022 4,15 44,6 46 >10000 127 150 6,22 285925 6580760 0,008 <0.005 0,005 4,28 350 109 >10000 330 91,8 >10.0 285925 6580760 0,009 <0.005 0,007 3,55 178,5 109 >10000 226 63,6 9,09 285925 6580760 0,015 <0.005 0,004 3 144,5 244 >10000 765 77,1 7,76	1,01 16,55 2,36 36,9 1,77 33,5 3,75 37,9 1,575 26,8 14,35 24,3 3,4 5,98 2,18 1,33 31,5 1,16 1,285 29,5 1,635 1,385 31,8 2,17 1,74 29 2,39 2,38 24,6 2,41 1,745
ROM2102
ROM2103
ROM2104
ROM2105
ROM2106
SKU2101
SKU2102
SKU2103
SKU2104
SKU2105
KAR2101
KAR2102
KAR2103
KAR2104
KAR2105
KAR2106
KAR2107
FEO2101
FEO2102
FEO2103
FEO2104
KAR2108
KAR2109
KAR2110
KAR2111

3

ASX Release

25.10.2021

==> picture [216 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2: Illustrative Reconnaissance Sampling Map Feøy

Figure 3: Illustrative Reconnaissance Sampling Map Skuterud

==> picture [321 x 314] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [321 x 335] intentionally omitted <==

4

25.10.2021

==> picture [216 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

ASX Release

Figure 4: Illustrative Reconnaissance Sampling Map Romsås

==> picture [402 x 284] intentionally omitted <==

Nord-Helgeland Project

Kuniko recently acquired exploration licenses to the Nord-Helgeland Project, a region identified as hosting and being prospective for Lithium-Cesium-Tantalum (“LCT”) pegmatites. Initial investigations by Geological Survey of Norway (“NGU”) geologists in 2004 provided a first regional description of pegmatite fractionation, and therefore fertility, trends. Based on the recommendations given in the 2004 report, an initial field reconnaissance was conducted by Kuniko in early October 2021. A selected number of previously delineated priority targets as well as conceptual targets were visited and rock chip/ composite sampled. Figures 7, 8 and 9 illustrate the areas Kuniko has focussed on initially.

Results of the 13 rock grab samples obtained during the October field visit are provided in Table 2. The data set has been used to generate fertility plots as a screening tool to prioritise these pegmatites on a regional scale. The plots demonstrate that fractionation grades and possibly hydrothermal overprinting are variable both at regional and local scale (refer Figure 5).

These preliminary investigations have indicated that a phase of detailed mapping and assessment is needed to pinpoint key locations in a large and mountainous area, while a significant number of pegmatites of unknown composition have been identified in satellite imagery across the project area and will be thoroughly investigated during 2022. Overall, this first field visit provides encouragement that the Nord-Helgeland project is a prospective project and there is scope for additional future exploration in the area. To augment future exploration programs, Kuniko has secured an exclusive access and an option over adjacent exploration licences in the project vicinity for a nominal cost (refer Figure 6).

5

25.10.2021

==> picture [216 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

ASX Release

Table 2:

Assay Results of Rock Chip / Composite samples from Nord-Helgeland Project

Sample ID	Easting (UTM 33N) Northing (UTM 33N) Be (ppm) Cs (ppm) K (%) Li (ppm) Nb (ppm) Rb (ppm) Sn (ppm) Ta (ppm) W (ppm)
601	454034 7406428 24,4 14,7 3,22 38 9,7 233 14 2,55 1,3 452734 7405797 6,4 5,4 4,51 10 10,5 274 12 0,91 2,9 452776 7405373 8,6 6 3,47 12 10,4 204 13 1,13 2,9 452826 7405356 10,1 3,1 1,8 28 13,6 103,5 11 1,26 3 452918 7405365 7,6 4,3 1,67 11 8,9 71,8 5 2,63 1,2 453659 7405853 99,6 79,6 3,19 19 30,8 378 19 7,48 1,6 431003 7409508 10 5,4 2,75 43 10,1 155,5 6 1,02 1,1 431053 7409473 9,7 11,4 4,95 35 60,2 474 48 4,5 6,9 431053 7409473 0,9 0,6 0,36 9 2,1 42,1 <3 0,28 <0.3 431040 7409496 2,8 7,5 6,42 6 4,7 336 4 0,63 0,6 442933 7418319 450 15,4 0,35 35 297 26,9 107 41,3 25,8 442913 7418396 38,6 29,8 0,67 60 19 91,6 8 4,33 2,3 442946 7418414 81,4 57,1 1,81 97 35 256 23 21,1 7,3
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613

Figure 5: Fractionation trends of pegmatites visited and sampled in September/ October 2021

==> picture [402 x 191] intentionally omitted <==

6

ASX Release

25.10.2021

==> picture [216 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 6: Location of NordHelgeland Project.

Includes exploration licenses granted to Kuniko and those secured by an exclusive access and option arrangement

==> picture [387 x 363] intentionally omitted <==

7

ASX Release

25.10.2021

==> picture [216 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 7: Bjerangsdalskardet (BDT) pegmatite field with examples of a 6-8 wide pegmatite dyke (BDT-8).

==> picture [336 x 279] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [361 x 279] intentionally omitted <==

8

25.10.2021

==> picture [216 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

ASX Release

Figure 8:

Map of Grønøya pegmatite field and photographs of (A) historic quarries; and (B) tourmaline mineralisation

==> picture [271 x 208] intentionally omitted <==

==> picture [259 x 236] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 9: Ørnes Be-Li rare metal pegmatite

==> picture [402 x 173] intentionally omitted <==

9

ASX Release

25.10.2021

==> picture [216 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

About Kuniko

Kuniko is focused on the development of copper, nickel, and cobalt projects in Scandinavia and has expanded its interests to include prospects for both battery and technology metals. Kuniko has a strict mandate to maintain net zero carbon footprint throughout exploration, development, and production of its projects.

In the event a mineable resource is discovered, and relevant permits granted, Kuniko is committed to sustainable, low carbon and ethical mining practices which embrace United Nations sustainable development goals. Kuniko activities now and in future will target sustainable practices extending to both life on land and life below water, which includes responsible disposal of waste rock away from fjords. Kuniko understands its activities will need to align with the interests of conservation, protected areas, cultural heritage, and indigenous peoples, amongst others.

Kuniko’s licence portfolio consists of the five (5) separate project areas.

• The South-west and South-east Norway exploration licenses are Ni-Cu-Co projects in the historically important Feøy and Romsås mining districts respectively.

• The South-central Norway cobalt exploration licenses are prospective for Co-Cu-Au, part of the historically important Skuterud mining district of central-southern Norway, previously the largest cobalt mining area in the world.

• The South-central Norway copper exploration licenses comprise of the Undal Cu-Zn-Co project and Vangrøfta Cu-Co-Au projects, located in the Trøndelag region of central Norway.

• ▪ The South-central Norway tenements comprising Ringerike, Krødsherad and Modum are prospective for Ni-Cu-Co-Au-PGE.

• The North-west Norway exploration licenses in the Nord-Helgeland region comprise Glomfjord, Meløya and Rundtinget, which contain identified LCT pegmatites and additional pegmatites of unknown composition.

Competent Persons Statement

Information in this report relating to Exploration Results is based on information reviewed by Dr Benedikt Steiner, who is a Chartered Geologist with the Geological Society of London and the European Federation of Geologists. Dr Steiner is an independent consultant of Kuniko Limited and has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined by the 2012 Edition of the Australasian Code for reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves. Dr Steiner consents to the inclusion of the data in the form and context in which it appears.

Enquiries

Joel Ives, Company Secretary Telephone: +61 8 6364 5095 Email: info@kuniko.eu

Authorisation

This announcement has been authorised by the Board of Directors of Kuniko Limited.

10

==> picture [216 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

ASX Release

11.10.2021

ANNEXURE – JORC Code, 2012 Edition – Table 1

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

(Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections)

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
Sampling	•	Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or specific	•	Soil sampling in the Vangrofta and Skuterud tenements aimed at collecting
techniques		specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals		tenement-scale geochemical baseline data supporting the delineation of
		under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF		exploration targets. Samples were collected along regular, pre-defined, 50 m
		instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad		x 50 m (Vangrofta) and 50 m x 100 m (Skuterud) grids, perpendicular to the
		meaning of sampling.		regional geological trend. Unsieved samples of approx. 800 g – 1 kg weight
	•	Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the		were manually obtained from the B-horizon by excavating approx. 50 cm x
		appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used.		50 cm x 30-40 cm extensive pits. Each plastic sample bag was zip-tied and
	•	Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public		labelled with a permanent marker pen as well as a sample ticket and a
		Report.		barcode sticker.
	•	In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this would be relatively	•	Where possible, the soil sampling teams obtained rock chip samples along
		simple (eg ‘reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples from		the soil grid lines and recorded the occurrence of outcrops, lithologies and
		which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fire assay’). In other		structural measurements. Care was taken to obtain rock samples from
		cases more explanation may be required, such as where there is coarse gold		outcrops and not float or otherwise transported material. Rock samples and
		that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation		structural measurements, along with relevant sample attribute data, were
		types (eg submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information.		logged into a GIS application on iPad devices and later synchronised to a
				master sample database.
			•	Waste pit grab samples in the Feøy, Karmøy , Romsas, Skuterud and
				Vangrofta were collected from loose, mineralized rocks in historic waste
				dumps in order to demonstrate mineralisation and grade patterns at these
				occurrences.
Drilling	•	Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast,	•	No drilling was undertaken on the Skuterud, Vangrofta and North Helgeland
techniques		auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple or standard tube,		license blocks.
		depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other type, whether core is oriented
		_and if so, by what method, etc). _
Drill sample	•	Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results	•	No drilling was undertaken on the Skuterud, Vangrofta and North Helgeland
recovery		assessed.		license blocks.
	•	Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature

11

==> picture [216 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

ASX Release

25.10.2021

		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	•	All rock chip and soil samples were comprehensively logged at each sample
		logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation,		location, including coordinate, geographic, and geological attributes. The
		mining studies and metallurgical studies.		data was saved into the Input GIS app on rugged iPad field devices and later
	•	Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean,		synchronized with a master database.
		channel, etc) photography.
	•	The total length andpercentage of the relevant intersections logged.
Sub-sampling	•	If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken.	•	Rock and soil samples were neither sub-sampled in the field, nor in the Asker
techniques and	•	If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether sampled		base. All samples were despatched to ALS laboratories in Pitea and Mala
sample		wet or dry.		(Sweden), where further sub-sampling and homogenization (PREP-41 for
preparation	•	For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the sample		soils, and PREP-31Y for rocks) was carried out in a controlled laboratory
		preparation technique.		environment.
	•	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	•	The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory	•	Rock and soil samples from Skuterud and Vangrofte were analysed at ALS
data and		procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total.		Loughrea (Ireland) using a near-total, four acid digest and a 48-element ICP-
laboratory tests	•	For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, the		MS analysis technique (ME-MS61), whereas a sodium peroxide fusion ICP-MS
		parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and		analysis technique (ME-MS89L) was used for pegmatite rock chip samples
		model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc.		obtained from the North Helgeland project. Where necessary, overlimit assay
	•	Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks, duplicates,		technique OG-62 was applied, if assay values were above the upper detection
		external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of		limit.
		bias) and precision have been established.	•	The analytical techniques are considered appropriate for the style of
				mineralisation and the nature of the exploration project.
			•	External certified reference materials were inserted at a 1:20 ratio, including
				standards (OREAS 86, OREAS 622), blanks (OREAS 22e), and field duplicates,
				which were obtained from the same sample pit as the original sample. The
				QAQC samples returned acceptable results.

12

==> picture [216 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

ASX Release

25.10.2021

Verification of	•	The verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative	•	No drilling was conducted by Kuniko on the properties.
sampling and		company personnel.
assaying	•	The use of twinned holes.
	•	Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data
		storage (physical and electronic) protocols.
	•	Discuss any adjustment to assay data.
Location of data	•	Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and down-hole	•	The location and spatial accuracy of data points were confirmed both using
points		surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource		Garmin GPS66s devices, as well as the in-built GPS tool of the iPad tablets.
		estimation.		The quality and accuracy of the measurements and topographic control are
	•	Specification of the grid system used.		deemed acceptable and sufficient.
	•	Quality and adequacy of topographic control.	•	The following projected coordinate grid systems were used: WGS 1984 UTM
				32N (for the Skuterud, Vangrofta, Feøy / Karmøy , Romsas, Undal projects)
				and WGS1984 UTM 33N (for the Nord Helgeland Project).
Data spacing	•	Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.	•	Soil sampling in the Vangrofta and Skuterud tenements aimed at collecting
and distribution	•	Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the degree of		tenement-scale geochemical baseline data supporting the delineation of
		geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore		exploration targets. Samples were collected along regular, pre-defined, 50 m
		Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied.		x 50 m (Vangrofta) and 50 m x 100 m (Skuterud) grids, perpendicular to the
	•	Whether sample compositing has been applied.		regional geological trend.
			•	Where possible, the soil sampling teams obtained rock samples along the soil
				grid lines and recorded the occurrence of outcrops, lithologies and structural
				measurements. Care was taken to obtain rock samples from outcrops and not
				float or otherwise transported material.
			•	Waste dump sampling was conducted to confirm the nature of the
				mineralisation.
			•	The spacing is sufficient for delineating targets for further exploration.
			•	No sample compositing was applied.
Orientation of	•	Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible	•	The soil sampling grids were designed to test the extent of the prevailing
data in relation		structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type.		regional mineralisation trend, whilst at the same time the samples were
to geological	•	If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key		collected in perpendicular lines to these trends.
structure		mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this	•	Rock samples were collected where sufficient outcrop (and not scree or
		should be assessed and reported if material.		boulder float) was available. The rock samples did not follow the same trend
				or density of the soil sampling grid.
			•	Due to the nature of waste dumps, grab samples were not collected from and
				along mineralised structures.

13

==> picture [216 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

Sample security • The measures taken to ensure sample security. Audits or • The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data. reviews

ASX Release

25.10.2021

• Each plastic sample bag was zip-tied and labelled with a permanent marker pen as well as a sample ticket and a barcode sticker.

• All sample batches were transported from the Vangrofta and Skuterud project sites to the main field hub in Asker, Norway, where they were visually checked and logged into a main database by the exploration manager, and subsequently safely couriered by DB Schenker to ALS laboratories in Pitea/ Mala (Sweden).

• Rock samples collected from the North Helgeland project were directly transported by the field team to ALS laboratories in Mala (Sweden).

• Dr Benedikt Steiner visited the Skuterud project from 12-20[th] August 2021, the Vangrofta project from 8-11[th] September 2021, and the North Helgeland project from 28[th] September – 4[th] October 2021.

• The sampling techniques and procedures practised by the field team were reviewed in the field, and a consistent and methodological approach confirmed.

14

==> picture [216 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

ASX Release

25.10.2021

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

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

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
Mineral	•	Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including agreements or	•	As of 15thOctober 2021, Kuniko Norge AS holds 100% interest in 57 tenement
tenement and		material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding		areas across Norway with a total landholding of 527.22 km2, whereas Kuniko
land tenure		royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and		Limited holds 100% interest in 32 tenement areas with a total landholding of
status		environmental settings.		262.87 km2(see Appendix 1 for a comprehensive list of current tenement
	•	The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known		areas).
		impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area.	•	All tenement areas have been granted and approved by the Norwegian
				Directorate of Mining (DIRMIN) for a period of 7 years.
			•	No other material issues or JV considerations are applicable or relevant.
Exploration	•	Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.	•	Limited historic investigations by the Norwegian Geological Survey (NGU) and
done by other				commercial exploration companies have been conducted on Kuniko’s
parties				tenements.
			•	Skuterud: The cobalt ores at Skuterud were discovered in 1772, and mine
				production commenced in 1776, to begin with in large open pits, and from
				1827 until the closure in 1898, in underground stopes. In the 1890s, ore
				reserves decreased rapidly, leading to the final shutdown of mining operation
				in 1898. The area remained idle until 2016 when Australian-based explorer
				Berkut Minerals Ltd. commenced exploration in the area north of the Skuterud
				historic mine site. Soil sampling covered the area between the Middagshvile
				and Dovikkollen historic open pits and mineral occurrences, and led to the
				delineation of follow-up drilling targets. One DD drillhole was completed at
				Dovikkollen and six DD drillholes at Middagshvile. The drilling campaign
				confirmed the presence of Co-Cu mineralization, however the exploration
				project was abandoned in 2018 and not pursued by Berkut any further.
			•	Vangrofta: Mining took place within this area periodically between 1707 and
				1908, at the Fredrik IV mine, and smaller scale test mining also occurred at the
				Flatskarvåsen and Vangrøfta workings. During the 1960s Røros Kobberverk
				carried out exploration within the Vangrøfta license, and NGU conducted an
				EM ground survey in 1966 (Sakshaug, 1967). A/S Sydvaranger conducted
				exploration within thegreenstone belt in mapsheet Dalsbygda in the 1970s,

15

==> picture [216 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

ASX Release

25.10.2021

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
			initiated by airborne geophysics (Håbrekke, 1975) and stream sediment
			sampling in 1974 (Krog, 1975). Follow-up exploration in 1975 included
			mapping, ground geophysics and soil sampling (Gvein, 1976), concluding that
			graphite schist and sulphide (mainly pyrite) disseminated quartz keratophyre
			and greenschist cause the known anomalies. Subsequently, Folldal Verk in
			joint venture with AMOCO explored the area between 1981-1984. Work
			included airborne geophysics (Dighem, 1982a and b), geological grid
			mapping, ground geophysics (VLF, CEM, IP and Mag), soil sampling and
			diamond drilling. Three drillholes were completed at their Nordervollen grid
			and one SW of Stordjupsjøen, just SW of the Kuniko license area. The
			conclusion was the same as the previous campaigns and the area was
			abandoned.
		•	Undal and Nyberget: No modern exploration has been carried out in the
			Undal and Nyberget areas. Undal has been known to contain mineralisation
			since the 17thcentury with limited periods of mining operations until 1971.
			Geological mapping, geophysical surveys, geochemical sampling and core
			drilling were carried out by various parties, such as Killingdal Gruber A/S from
			1950-1970, Undal Verk A/S in the 1960s, and NGU in 1997. Most known
			mineral occurrences in the Nyberget area were sampled by the NGU in 1997,
			with no significant exploration carried out before or after.
		•	North Helgeland: Limited investigations by NGU in 2004 (Ihlen, 2004) led to
			the description of selected LCT pegmatite occurrences (e.g. Agskardet), and the
			shortlisting of priority pegmatites based on K/Rb and K/Cs fertility indicators.
			No further commercial exploration has been completed in the area to date.
		•	Romsås: No modern exploration has been carried out in the Romsås area
			since the mine closed in 1876 following a three-year operational period that
			led to the production of 16,465 t with a Ni content of about 150 t (Often and
			Nilsson, 2012). A wealth of classic 19thcentury studies, mainly descriptive in
			nature, were compiled by academics and other Norwegian pioneer geologists.
			The most recent description of Romsås is found in Boyd and Nixon (1985)
		•	Feøy / Karmøy: There are no contemporary exploration results or exploration
			targets available for the tenements in English language or public domain
			literature. However, historical exploration was conducted byA/S Sydvaranger

16

==> picture [216 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

ASX Release

25.10.2021

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
				who bought the mining rights in 1972 and carried out prospecting, but no
				mining, in the area. The company started to de-water the Old Vigsnes mine to
				evaluate ore mineralisation at depth. Underground geophysical
				measurements were carried out in 1974 with the aim to map several
				geophysical field variations around the deposit, such as to get a better
				understanding of the ore complex and to search for additional mineralisation.
				The geophysical methods used were self-potential (SP), charged potential
				(CP), Very Low Frequency-EM (VLF), and gravimetry. The results from these
				measurements, and sketches of the mine, are reported in Gronlie and Logn
				(1978), who stated that the combination of geophysical methods proved to be
				useful and provided information about the boundaries of the worked ore
				bodies.
Geology	•	Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	•	Skuterud: The cobalt occurrences in the Skuterud and Modum areas are
				related to sulphide-rich schist zones, so-called fahlbands. The most extensive
				sulphide-rich zone has a length of 12 km along strike, and is up to 100–200 m
				wide. The rock type hosting the sulphides can be characterized as a quartz-
				plagioclase-tourmaline-phlogopite-sulphide gneiss or schist. Graphite is
				locally common and its content may attain more than 5% of the rock. The
				cobalt mineralisation is, to a large degree, characterised by impregnation of
				cobaltite (CoAsS), glaucodote ((Co, Fe) AsS), safflorite ((Co, Fe) As2) and
				skutterudite (CoAs3), which partly occur as enriched in quartz-rich zones and
				lenses. The cobalt-rich lenses are structurally controlled, following axes of
				folds and lineations in the area.
			•	Vangrøfta: The Vangrøfta tenement is located in the Folldal-Meråker Cu-Zn
				metallogenic area of south-central Norway. The tenement contains an
				uncertain number of either (1) volcanic-associated (VMS) massive sulphide
				and (2) epigenetic, hydrothermal, narrow-vein style copper-gold-cobalt
				deposits hosted in sheared (meta) gabbroic rocks. Massive sulphide lenses (1)
				and narrow veins (2) contain pyrite, chalcopyrite, and sphalerite mineralisation.
			•	Undal/ Nyberget: The Undal and Nyberget Tenements are located within the
				Kvikne-Singsås Cu-Zn-Ni metallogenic area, whereas the Undal deposit is
				related to volcanic-associated(VMS)massive sulphide mineralisation,located

17

==> picture [216 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

ASX Release

25.10.2021

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
			in a graphitic phyllite with minor greenstone occurrences, belonging to the
			Undal Formation. This unit was interpreted as a tectonic mélange (Horne,
			1979), situated between the Gula Group and the Støren Group in the
			Trondheim Nappe Complex. The deposit is about 600 m long and takes the
			form of a thin ruler, approx. 70 m wide and 3–5 m thick. It is a pyritic ore body
			with subordinate chalcopyrite and sphalerite. Analysis of ore production
			yielded 1.15 % Cu, 1.86 % Zn, 43.2 % Fe and 41.1 % S (Foslie, 1926). About
			279,000 t ore was produced from the deposit between 1952 and 1971.
		•	North Helgeland: The North Helgeland pegmatite field is located in variably
			metamorphosed Caledonian metasediments. Subduction and related anataxis
			led to the formation of anatectic melts and hundreds of pegmatite pods at
			various depths in the crystalline basement. There is currently no known
			granitic source batholith that would explain a relationship with magmatic
			source rocks in the area. As a result pegmatite of variable origin are
			encountered, such as ceramic/ abyssal pegmatites (deep subduction domain)
			prospective for high purity quartz and feldspar, and Li-Cs-Ta (LCT) rare metal
			pegmatites (shallow crustal depths). Kuniko’s principal exploration targets are
			rare metal pegmatites of the LCT type.
		•	Romsås: The Romsås deposit is an orthomagmatic, Ni-Cu-Co deposit in the
			Indre Østfold Ni-Cu metallogenic area (Often and Nilsson, 2012). It is located
			within a minor quartz noritic body of assumed Mesoproterozoic age
			surrounded by migmatitic gneisses of presumed sedimentary origin and
			interpreted as Mesoproterozoic greywacke-dominated metasediments
			(Bingen et al., 2005). Orbicular norite is partly cut by the sulphide ore zones.
		•	Feøy / Karmøy: The Feøy Project area contains orthomagmatic, Ni-Cu-PGE
			mineralization, whereas volcanic-associated (VMS) massive sulphide-related
			Cu and Zn mineralization is present at Karmøy (Sandstad, 2012). The area
			comprises an ophiolite complex in the southwestern most part of the
			Norwegian Caledonides. It constitutes part of an immature arc–supra-
			subduction zone ophiolite sequence of Laurentian affinity that includes the
			Karmøy–Bømlo–Hardanger area (Grenne et al. 1999). The sequence upwards
			from ultramafic and mafic intrusive, sheeted dykes, pillow lava, pyroclastic
			rock, volcanoclastic rock, pillow lava and sedimentaryunits is well exposed.

18

==> picture [216 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

ASX Release

25.10.2021

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
				Feøy, a minor Ni-Cu deposit, is located in the sheeted-dyke complex on the
				island of Feøy. Several Cu-Zn VMS deposits and a few vein deposits are
				confined to the lower pillow lavas and the sheeted-dyke complex of the Visnes
				Group. The VMS ore bodies at Vigsnes and Rødkleiv are located in a 50–60 m
				wide zone dominated by chlorite-rich greenschist. The shearing is assumed to
				post-date the formation of the massive sulphide bodies. The strike of the
				sequence is NW–SE with a steep dip towards the NE and across the island. At
				the Vigsnes mine, six cigar- or plate-shaped ore bodies were exploited to a
				depth of 732 m. The two largest of these were 400–450 m long, up to 175 m
				wide and with thicknesses of the order of 5–30 m. The massive sulphide ores
				are banded and pyrite, chalcopyrite and sphalerite-rich. Several minor massive
				sulphide deposits exist to the SE, along strike from Vigsnes and Rødkleiv, such
				as, Hinderaker, Sletthei, Knoff/Huelva and Jordan.
Drill hole	•	A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration	•	No drilling was conducted by Kuniko on the properties.
Information		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, maximum	•	No drilling was conducted by Kuniko on the properties.
aggregation		and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut-off
methods		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.

19

==> picture [216 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

ASX Release

25.10.2021

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
	•	The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values should be
		clearly stated.
Relationship	•	These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Exploration	•	No drilling was conducted by Kuniko on the properties.
between		Results.
mineralisation	•	If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is
widths and		known, its nature should be reported.
intercept	•	If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there should be
lengths		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	•	No drilling was conducted by Kuniko on the properties, and therefore no
		should be included for any significant discovery being reported These should		maps and sections are reported.
		include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill hole collar locations and	•	Maps of the soil and rock sampling locations are included in the report.
		appropriate sectional views.
Balanced	•	Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not practicable,	•	Significant geochemical anomaly results in exploration data acquired by
reporting		representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths should be		Kuniko are included in the report.
		practiced to avoid misleading reporting of Exploration Results.	•	A summary statistics table of soil and rock chip sampling results are included
				in the report.
Other	•	Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported	•	Relevant exploration data is shown in report figures, in the text and in cited
substantive		including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey		reference documents.
exploration		results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and method of
data		treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical
		and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances.
Further work	•	The nature and scale of planned further work (eg tests for lateral extensions or	•	Future plans for exploration on the properties include additional soil sampling,
		depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling).		channel rock chip composite sampling, and DD drilling. A project review and
	•	Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions, including the		exploration targeting study will be completed in Q4 2021 and Q1 2022 in order
		main geological interpretations and future drilling areas, provided this		to define an exploration plan for the 2022 summer season.
		information is not commercially sensitive.

20