Quarterlytics / Basic Materials / Agricultural Inputs / Highfield Resources Ltd

Highfield Resources Ltd

hfr · ASX Basic Materials
Claim this profile
Ticker hfr
Exchange ASX
Sector Basic Materials
Industry Agricultural Inputs
Employees 11-50
← All annual reports
FY2020 Annual Report · Highfield Resources Ltd
Sign in to download
Loading PDF…
I

I

D
E
T
M
L
S
E
C
R
U
O
S
E
R
D
L
E
F
H
G
H

I

I

Annual Report
31 December  2020

highfieldresources.com.au

7
5
2
8
1
9
3
5
1

1
5
N
B
A

 
 
 
 
 
 
Contents 

Corporate Directory 

Chairman’s Letter  

CEO’s Letter  

Sustainability Report 

Directors’ Report 

Financial Report 

Page

2

4

6

9

43

81

Consolidated	Statement	of	Profit	or	Loss	and	Other	Comprehensive	Income	

82

Consolidated Statement of Financial Position 

Consolidated Statement of Changes in Equity 

Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows 

Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements 

Directors’ Declaration 

Auditor’s Independence Declaration 

Independent Auditor’s Report 

ASX Additional Information 

83

84

85

86

111

112

113

119

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS

1

	
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Corporate Directory 

Directors

Registered Office & Principal Place 

of Business

169 Fullarton Road

DULWICH, SA 5065

Telephone 

+61 8 8133 5000

Facsimile 

+61 8 8431 3502

Website 

highfieldresources.com.au

Share Registry

Advanced	Share	Registry	Pty	Ltd 

110 Stirling Highway 

NEDLANDS, WA 6009

Telephone  

+61 8 9389 8033

Facsimile  

+61 8 9389 7871

Auditor

Pricewaterhouse Coopers 

Level	11/70	Franklin	Street	 

ADELAIDE, SA 5000

Telephone  

+61 8 8218 7000

Facsimile  

+61 8 8218 7999

Stock Exchange

Australian Securities Exchange 
(Home Exchange: Perth, Western Australia)

ASX Code  

HFR

Mr. Richard Crookes 

Independent	Non-Executive	Chairman

Ms. Pauline Carr 

Independent	Non-Executive	Director

Mr. Roger Davey 

Independent	Non-Executive	Director

Mr. Brian Jamieson 

Non-Executive	Director

Mr. Isaac Querub 

Independent	Non-Executive	Director

Company Secretary

Ms. Katelyn Adams 

2

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSHIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS

3
3

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSChairman’s Letter 

Dear Shareholders,

It has been a challenging year for many reasons, but as I write this letter, I am extremely optimistic about 

the	immediate	and	long-term	potential	of	your	Company.	

Of	course,	we	have	had	to	deal	with	a	global	pandemic	and	the	frustrating	wait	for	the	award	of	a	Mining	

Concession	for	our	Muga	Potash	Project,	however,	the	future	looks	bright.	We	have	a	new	CEO,	our	employees	

remain	safe,	healthy	and	motivated,	and	we	believe	2021	will	see	us	awarded	a	Mining	Concession,	raise	the	

development	capital	for	Muga	and	commence	construction.	

On	the	first	point,	the	most	significant	event	of	the	year	for	me	was	the	recruitment	of	Ignacio	Salazar	as	

your	new	CEO.	We	were	fortunate	to	complete	interviews	before	any	travel	lockdowns	were	imposed	and	the	

Board	was	delighted	that	Ignacio	was	prepared	to	join	us	amidst	the	ensuing	Covid-19	related	chaos.	Ignacio	

hit	the	ground	running	on	20	July	2020	following	a	seamless	transition	and	he	and	his	family	have	now	been	

residents	of	Pamplona	for	over	six	months	and	are	settling	in	well.	I	cannot	over	emphasize	how	important	

it	is	for	the	Company	to	have	a	Spanish	CEO	of	Ignacio’s	calibre	to	take	us	forward	into	construction	and	

production	and	we	are	fortunate	to	have	such	a	strong	and	experienced	leader	for	our	business.	

Spain	was	particularly	hard-hit	by	the	arrival	of	Covid-19	across	Northern	Europe.	A	State	of	Alarm	was	enacted	

on	14	March	2020,	which	resulted	in	the	closure	of	our	Pamplona	office	and	all	staff	working	remotely	until	

the	end	of	July.	There	were,	and	continue	to	be,	obvious	operational	challenges,	but	fortunately,	everyone	

remains	well,	and	the	team	has	reacted	very	positively	to	the	new	working	environment,	involving	reduced	

office	numbers	on	rotation,	with	increased	separation	in	the	office,	coupled	with	mask-wearing	and	other	

personal	 safety	 measures.	 From	 the	 relative	 safety	 and	 low	 impact	 of	 the	 virus	 in	 Australia,	 it	 is	 often	

difficult	to	fully	appreciate	the	challenges	faced	by	most	of	the	world	caused	by	such	an	unprecedented	

pandemic.	Our	continued	thanks	go	out	to	all	our	employees	and	their	families	for	continuing	to	support	

each	other,	work	hard	and	retain	an	optimistic	spirit	during	these	times.			

We	 lodged	 our	 Mining	 Concession	 documentation	 to	 all	 three	 relevant	 approval	 Authorities	 on	 13	 March	

2020,	expecting	a	roughly	six-month	approval	timeline.	However,	Covid-19	did	cause	some	delays	to	the	

Government	 approval	 process	 and	 further,	 we	 were	 requested	 to	 endure	 another	 unexpected	 30-day	

Public	Exposition	of	the	Restoration	Plan,	which	commenced	in	July	2020.	The	public	review	period	for	

the	documentation	concluded	at	the	end	of	August,	with	relatively	few	questions	and	requests	made	and	

no	 new	 material	 matters	 raised.	 The	 Government	 formally	 requested	 additional	 information	 based	 on	

the	 public	 exposition,	 divided	 into	 five	 sections,	 which	 has	 now	 been	 provided.	 The	 Company	 has	 done	

everything	that	it	possibly	can	in	a	timely	manner	to	secure	a	positive	approval	and	the	ball	is	now	entirely	

in	the	court	of	the	approval	Authorities.	We	are	disappointed	that	the	Mining	Concession	has	not	yet	been	

awarded	but	remain	extremely	optimistic	that	it	will	be	approved	soon.	

“We are well prepared to 
advance through financing 
and into construction once 
the Mining Concession is 
received and I look forward 
to talking next year about 
the positive progress we 
will have made in 2021. ”

4

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSWe	are	well	prepared	to	advance	through	financing	and	into	construction	once	the	Mining	Concession	is	

received	and	I	look	forward	to	talking	next	year	about	the	positive	progress	we	will	have	made	in	2021.	

Continuing	on	from	last	year	our	upbeat	outlook	for	global	potash	demand	remains.	I	am	pleased	to	re-

affirm	our	view	that	the	potash	sector	continues	to	be	an	attractive	place	to	invest,	with	current	growth	in	

consumption	reflected	by	recent	increases	in	the	MOP	price.	The	European	MOP	price	premium	over	other	

markets	remains,	supporting	our	thesis	on	Muga	being	one	of	the	best	and	most	favourably	located	projects	

in	the	world.	Market	experts	continue	to	predict	improved	pricing	over	the	next	couple	of	years	as	we	move	

into	production.			

Thank	you	for	your	ongoing	support.	

Richard Crookes

Chairman 

30 March 2021

“ I am pleased to re-affirm 
our view that the potash 
sector continues to be an 
attractive place to invest.”

5

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSCEO’s Letter 

Dear Shareholders,

This	is	my	first	letter	as	CEO	of	Highfield.		I	joined	the	Company	at	the	end	of	July	2020	with	gratitude	for	

the	confidence	the	Company	put	in	me	and	aware	of	the	responsibility	and	the	challenge	in	front	of	us.		We	

are	approaching	a	critical	milestone	when	the	Company	moves	from	a	period	dominated	by	the	permitting	

process	into	the	exciting	moment	when	we	start	building	the	Muga	Mine	and	get	us	to	production.		I	fully	

share	the	anxiety	that	many	shareholders	feel	and	so	I	plan	to	get	us	to	that	point	as	soon	as	possible.			

We	achieved	our	objectives	in	all	areas	of	the	Muga	Project	that	were	in	our	control	in	2020.	We	are	ready	

with	the	engineering,	sales,	and	financial	aspects	of	the	project.	Most	of	the	permitting	work	is	also	behind	

us.	Since	I	joined,	I	gradually	got	to	know	and	deal	with	the	Spanish	authorities	more	frequently	and	the	

effort	we	are	putting	in	now	is,	with	no	doubt	in	my	mind,	making	a	difference.	In	the	meantime,	the	staff,	

the	Board	and	contractors	are	taking	austerity	measures	to	protect	the	Project	and	defend	the	Company.		

Furthermore,	we	have	recently	been	pleasantly	surprised	by	a	very	thorough	Social	Baseline	study	prepared	

by	the	Navarran	Government	which	endorses	the	substantial	benefits	of	the	Muga	Project	in	the	community.		

We	expect	to	see	the	final	stage	of	the	permitting	process	closed	soon	and	the	Company	moving	into	a	very	

different	phase.	

Muga	is	a	Tier	1	project.		The	mineralization	is	shallow,	with	no	need	of	a	shaft	to	reach	it	and	there	are	

no	aquifers	above	it.	There	is	great	infrastructure	already	in	place	in	the	region	including	motorways,	an	

electricity	substation	next	to	the	mine	and	the	deep	water	port	of	Bilbao	at	200km	from	our	Project.	Most	

importantly,	the	mine	is	located	in	the	heart	of	a	European	agricultural	region	with	clear	deficit	in	potash	

supply.	We	are	currently	less	than	40	people	in	the	Company,	and	we	plan	to	get	to	800.		Our	ESG	credentials	

are	 world	 class,	 especially	 on	 the	 environmental	 side,	 as	 we	 are	 building	 a	 mine	 which	 will	 leave	 zero	

residues.		Hopefully,	we	are	also	entering	a	phase	of	increasing	potash	prices	globally.			

We	cannot	wait	to	see	the	Muga	Project	in	place	and	producing.	We	are	transforming	the	Company	in	the	

process.		Growth	is	the	essence	of	any	junior	mining	company,	and	this	is	just	the	beginning.	

I	want	to	thank	shareholders	for	their	support	and	confidence	and	wish,	Covid-19	permitting,	we	can	meet	

soon.	

Ignacio Salazar 

Chief	Executive	Officer		

30 March 2021

6

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSHIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS

7
7

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS88
8

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSSustainability 
Report

CEO Letter 

About this Section 

Exemplifying the Sustainable Mining Paradigm 

Goals and Targets

2020 Highlights

9

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSCEO Letter

Dear Shareholders,

In	 a	 particularly	 strange	 and	 unpredictable	 year,	 we	 have	 heard	 more	 voices	 than	 ever	 calling	 on	 all	

industries	to	diligently	integrate	ESG	factors	into	their	business	model.	For	a	small	company	like	Highfield,	

this	is	however	its	sixth	Sustainability	Report	on	environmental,	social	and	governance	factors	(ESG).	For	

me,	joining	the	Company	last	year,	it	is	very	clear	ESG	is	an	integral	part	of	our	business.	This	is	a	crucial	

moment	 for	 Highfield.	 The	 Company	 is	 moving	 from	 a	 period	 dominated	 by	 the	 permitting	 process	 into	

the	exciting	moment	when	it	starts	building	the	Muga	Project	to	get	to	production.	The	Company	and	the	

project	have	very	strong	fundamentals	to	build	upon.  

On	environmental	matters,	Highfield	is	already	a	pioneer	in	its	approach	to	waste	management.	The	Muga	

Potash	 Mine	 has	 been	 designed	 under	 the	 premise	 of	 zero	 waste.  	 I	 wonder	 how	 many	 mines,	 and	 for	

that	matter,	any	other	economic	activities,	can	say	that.	The	common	practice	to	deal	with	these	waste	

materials	in	the	industry	is	to	dispose	them	on	heaps	or	in	tailings	ponds.	Although	this	practice	is	generally	

accepted and permissible in most countries, expectations for a more sustainable treatment are growing 

within	the	public.	In	the	Muga	Project,	Highfield	will	be	backfilling	such	waste	materials	in	the	mine	and	

will	be	implementing	a	new	method	for	mechanical	backfilling	of	dewatered	potash	waste.	This	method	

can	 achieve	 a	 significantly	 higher	 backfill	 density	 than	 backfill	 placed	 with	 traditional	 methods.  During	

the	year	we	finalised	the	engineering	of	our	backfilling	process,	a	key	investment	in	R&D	that	guarantees	

compliance	 with	 the	 highest	 environmental	 standards	 whilst	 setting	 a	 benchmark	 in	 the	 mining	 sector	

in	terms	of	waste	management.	In	addition	to	backfilling,	Highfield	will	be	upgrading	waste	material	into	

vacuum	salt	and	de-icing	salt	to	be	commercialized. 

In	a	broader	sense,	when	looking	at	the	Sustainable	Development	Goals	set	up	by	the	United	Nations,	the	

Muga	Project	is	our	opportunity	to	play	a	significant	role	in	the	global	fight	to	eradicate	hunger,	through	the	

production	of	potash	for	fertilisers.	Smart	fertilisation	of	soils	is	essential	to	address	the	ever-decreasing	

arable	 land	 and	 the	 growing	 population	 of	 the	 planet.	 Intrinsic	 to	 our	 business,	 Highfield	 contributes	 to	

Sustainable	 Development	 Goal	 (“SDG”)	 2	 of	 Eradicating	 Hunger,	 and	 also	 to	 other	 SDGs	 including	 SDG	 8,	

Decent	Work	and	Economic	Growth,	SDG	9,	Industry,	Innovation	and	Infrastructure,	and	SDG	15,	Life	on	Land. 	

These	SDGs	are	aligned	with	our	strategic	objectives	and	our	vision	of	creating	a	sustainable,	profitable,	

safe	business	with	the	utmost	respect	for	the	environment	and	our	stakeholders.  

Regarding	social	aspects,	this	unusual	year	has	given	us	the	opportunity	to	continue	working	closely	with	

our	local	communities	by	assisting	them	during	the	coronavirus	crisis.	One	noteworthy	example	has	been	

the	personal	contribution	of	our	staff	through	donations	to	communities	and	front-line	organisations. 	This	

initiative,	called	Stop	Covid,	has	managed	to	reach	more	than	eleven	towns	in	the	area	of	the	Muga	Mine,	

helping	over	10,000	inhabitants	with	Personal	Protective	Equipment	donations	and	disinfection	materials. 	

Throughout	the	year,	we	continued	engaging	with	local	communities	though	our	corporate	volunteering	

initiatives.  

In	terms	of	relations	with	our	Government	stakeholders,	we	are	delighted	to	have	recently	received	the	

independent	 report	 published	 by	 the	 Government	 of	 Navarra	 on	 the	 Social	 Baseline	 in	 the	 region,	 and	

its	conclusions	about	the	positive	social	impact	of	the	Muga	Project.	We	welcome	the	rigour	and	energy	

For me, joining the 
Company last year, 
it is very clear ESG is 
an integral part of our 
business.

10

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSCEO Letter

that	went	into	producing	this	study	and	the	proactiveness	of	the	Government	of	Navarra	in	undertaking	

this	initiative	early	in	the	process.	At	the	same	time,	we	appreciate	the	endorsement	of	the	Government	

of	Navarra	of	the	socio-economic	contributions	of	Muga	and	look	forward	to	working	together	with	the	

Government,	 local	 communities	 and	 all	 interested	 parties	 to	 get	 the	 Muga	 Mine	 into	 production	 for	 the	

benefit	of	all	stakeholders.  

Uncertainty	presents	challenges	for	every	organisation.	Highfield	is	about	to	embark	on	a	major	growth	

journey.	With	our	values	of	Commitment,	Respect,	Excellence	and	Attitude,	our	strong	ESG	focus	and	a	

high-quality	project	like	Muga,	we	are	ready	to	create	a	robust	and	sustainable	potash	business. 

We	 thank	 you	 all	 for	 your	 support	 as	 we	 make	 this	 Project	 become	 reality	 for	 the	 benefit	 of	 all	 our	

stakeholders. 

Ignacio Salazar  

Chief	Executive	Officer		

Ignacio Salazar
Chief Executive Officer

11

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSAbout this Section

This	 section	 highlights	 all	 ESG	 activities	 carried	 out	 during	 2020	 by	 Highfield	 Resources	 Limited	 (the	

“Company”	or	“Highfield”)	and	its	Spanish	subsidiary	Geoalcali	SLU	(“Geoalcali”),	together	“the	Group”.	

This	section	is	a	summarised	version	of	the	Company’s	Sustainability	Report	2020	that	has	been	prepared	

in	 accordance	 with	 the	 GRI	 Standards:	 Core	 option.	 GRI	 is	 an	 international	 independent	 organization	

that	 helps	 businesses,	 governments	 and	 other	 organizations	 understand	 and	 communicate	 the	 impact	

of business on critical sustainability issues such as climate change, human rights, corruption and many 

others.	Additionally,	as	a	signatory	member	to	the	United	Nations	Global	Compact,	this	report	also	sets	

out the information required by the Communication on Progress guidelines of Global Compact reporting 

initiative.	

The  Group  is  committed  to  sustainable  practices  and  is  carrying  out  a  number  of  actions  to  align  its 

processes and policies with international guidelines as part of its strategy to build a resilient and robust 

project.	 The	 Group	 remains	 supportive	 of	 the	 Sustainable	 Development	 Goals	 (SDGs),	 which	 seek	 to	

encourage	measures	to	build	a	sustainable	world.	We	continue	to	work	towards	this	vision	by	committing	

to	implement	a	large	project	with	integrated	initiatives	that	contribute	to	those	objectives,	with	special	

emphasis	 on	 our	 social	 and	 natural	 environment.	 In	 this	 sixth	 report,	 our	 stakeholders	 will	 have	 the	

opportunity	to	review	the	Group’s	performance	and	to	contact	us	with	suggestions	or	comments	with	the	

aim	of	improving	our	accountability	and	transparency	commitments.	During	this	exceptional	year,	we	also	

wanted	to	speak	directly	with	our	local	stakeholders	to	better	understand	if	our	sustainable	approach	is	

meaningful.	In	this	report,	readers	will	have	the	opportunity	to	listen	directly	to	this	important	stakeholder	

group.	 At	 the	 same	 time,	 the	 report	 highlights	 our	 performance	 in	 the	 four	 key	 areas	 that	 make	 up	 our	

Sustainability	Framework:	Our Business, Our Environment, Our People, and Our Community.	

The	Group	has	revised	its	internal	and	external	analysis	to	refine	material	topics	relevant	to	the	business	

and	 its	 stakeholders.	 The	 Group	 has	 engaged	 actively	 with	 all	 stakeholders	 and	 continued	 monitoring	

relevant	events.	In	addition,	relevant	sustainability	trends	that	affect	the	business	have	been	considered	

and	included	in	our	analytical	processes	to	determine	and	define	strategies	to	minimise	negative	impacts	

and	at	the	same	time	maximise	opportunities	to	deliver	positive	effects.

Results	from	this	analysis	establish	the	commitments	and	goals	which	are	backed	up	by	specific	systems	

and	detailed	processes	that	are	monitored	during	the	year.	This	process	allows	the	Group	to	continuously	

improve	in	each	of	the	four	key	areas.

12
12

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSSustainability Framework 

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS

13
13

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSExemplifying the 
Sustainable Mining 
Paradigm

We	are	currently	living	in	the	era	of	green	transition	towards	a	low	carbon	economy	which	requires	metals	

and	other	minerals.	Potash	is	also	necessary	to	achieve	this	goal,	key	for	fertilisers	which	optimise	the	

use	of	land,	water	consumption,	thus	addressing	a	food	security	issue.		At	the	same	time,	in	order	for	such	

transition	to	succeed,	minerals	must	be	mined	and	processed	in	a	sustainable	and	environmentally	friendly	

way,	such	as	Muga´s	potash	mineral.

14

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSPotash `The Fertiliser Mineral´ and its 
Contribution to Fighting Climate Change 

The	International	Fertilizer	Association	(IFA)	has	shown	that	mineral	fertilisers	can	play	a	part	in	mitigating	

and  adapting  to,  climate  change,  when  their  use  follows  best  practices  in  the  four  areas  of  nutrient 

management	(source,	rate,	time	and	place).	Correct	fertiliser	use	helps	by:	

 — contributing to plant growth; 

 — increasing soil carbon sequestration; 

 — enhancing crop resilience; 

 — enhancing	water	use	efficiency;	

 — reducing	nutrient	losses	to	the	environment;	and	

 — stalling	deforestation.	

Primary	crop	production	has	been	identified	among	the	eight	materials	responsible	for	greenhouse	gas	

(GHG)	emissions,	water	use	and	land	use.	Fertilisers	are	critical	to	optimising	this	impact	especially	with	

the	global	population	expected	to	reach	9.7	billion	people	by	2050	(Food	and	Agriculture	Organization	of	

the	United	Nations),	which	means	the	agricultural	sector	must	increase	productivity	by	an	estimated	60%	

compared	with	2005	to	meet	an	increasing	global	demand	in	food	(Alexandratos	and	Bruinsma	2012).	Global	

food	security	is	not	achievable	without	fertilisers.	

A	study	by	CGIAR	Research	Program	on	Climate	Change,	Agriculture	and	Food	Security	(CCAFS)	:	“Fertiliser	

use	 and	 soil	 carbon	 sequestration:	 trade-offs	 and	 opportunities”,	 shows	 that	 use	 of	 mineral	 fertiliser	

enhances	carbon	sequestration	in	agricultural	soils,	thus	contributing	to	the	fight	against	climate	change.	

According	to	the	IFA,	soils	can	store	up	to	50-300	tonnes	of	carbon	per	hectare,	which	is	equivalent	to	180-

1,100 tonnes of CO2.

Primary crops need 
fertilisers to optimise 
water consumption and 
land use.

The use of fertilisers 
reduces agricultural land 
use by 20%.

EIGHT MATERIALS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR:
Steel, aluminium, plastic, cement, glass, wood, primary crops and cattle

Of these materials:

89% of agriculture’s 
future mitigation potential 
(maximised by smart 
fertiliser use) is based on 
soil carbon sequestration.

Implementing circular economy measures in these areas can 
help address climate change, water and land use challenges

Source:	Circular	economy:	environmental	benefits,	Ecofys	&	WBCSD

15

Vision and Values

The	vision	of	the	Group	is	encompassed	by	its	core	values	CREA,	Commitment,	Excellence,	Respect	and	

Attitude, which form the basis of the eight principles of our Sustainable Roadmap outlined below:  

The Group’s vision is 
“To build a successful, 
sustainable, potash 
business with respect 
for stakeholders and the 
environment”.  

1 

2 

Integrate an ethical management 
that	considers	risk	analysis	to	
guarantee the best results for our 
stakeholders	

Adopt best practices in health and 
safety with the aim of guaranteeing 
the protection of our employees and 
our communities 

3 

4 

Ensure	the	best	environmental	
results, optimising energy use and 
the responsible management of 
resources 

Encourage the participation and 
communication of our communities 
to ensure that their expectations 
and needs are considered

5 

6 

Uphold	the	principles	of	diversity	to	
ensure that equality is part of our 
corporate culture  

Look	for	continuous	improvement	
through measurement mechanisms 
with	the	aim	of	achieving	excellence	
in	all	our	activities	

7 

8 

Always act with integrity, honesty 
and equanimity with all our 
stakeholders	

Adopt an approach that is 
consistent	with	our	vision	and	
corporate	values	in	our	decision-
making	processes,	as	the	main	
drivers	to	generate	value	and	a	
sustainable outcome

16

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSThe Holistic Approach of our Business 

During	2020,	the	Government	of	Spain	issued	a	Roadmap	for	the	Sustainable	Management	of	Mineral	Raw	

Materials	 for	 public	 consultation.	 The	 Spanish	 mining	 industry	 submitted	 a	 response	 highlighting	 that	

according	to	studies	undertaken	in	this	field,	a	tonne	of	mineral	raw	material	extracted	and	processed	in	

Spain	meets	significantly	more	SDGs	and	generates	lower	CO2 emissions than a tonne from almost anywhere 
else	in	the	world,	where	extraction	and	processing	is	most	likely	carried	out	under	legislation	less	stringent	

than	that	of	the	European	Union,	in	terms	of	environmental	protection,	health	and	safety,	and	human	rights.		

It	also	stated	that	production	in	less	regulated	countries	has	a	higher	environmental	cost	(CO2 footprint, 
among	others)	and	higher	economic	costs	derived	from	transport	to	end	users,	as	opposed	to	European	

producers	with	high	environmental	standards	that	target	domestic	markets.		In	this	context,	Muga	Mine’s	

location	close	to	a	high	consuming	European	potash	market	means	its	supply	chain	has	a	low	environmental	

impact.		

In	addition,	since	its	inception,	the	Company	has	maintained	a	high	standard	of	Environmental,	Social	and	

Governance	performance	through	the	implementation	of	a	broad	range	of	initiatives	aimed	at	minimizing	

negative	 impacts	 of	 its	 operations,	 maximising	 their	 positive	 impacts,	 and	 contributing	 actively	 to	 the	

achievement	of	the	UN’s	SDGs.	As	well	as	optimising	its	interaction	with	stakeholders,	the	Group	considers	

its	corporate	sustainability	strategy	is	a	critical	factor	for	success	in	everything	we	do.		

This	 responsible	 approach	 helps	 us	 address	 every	 aspect	 that	 is	 key	 for	 a	 successful	 outcome	 for	 an	

enduring	business	like	Muga.	The	Group	has	incorporated	international	sustainability	guidelines	that	help	

us	assess	and	measure	our	performance	and	are	aligned	with	our	strategic	goals.	

“Our society needs to 
ensure a responsible 
supply chain. For that, 
we must understand the 
traceability of the minerals 
that form part of the 
products we consume.  
The Muga potash will be 
produced in a manner 
that ensures the highest 
social and environmental 
standards, fully aligned 
with the UN’s Sustainable 
Development Goals.”

Ignacio Salazar

Chief Executive Officer 
of Geoalcali and Highfield 
Resources

17

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSWhy Muga is an ESG `Top in Class´ Mine 

Muga Mine is the only 
room and pillar potash 
mine in the world that 
targets	zero	residue	on	
surface at the time of 
mine	closure.

All of our suppliers must 
carry out sustainability 
assessments and comply 
with	our	local	buy	policy.

We are committed to 
contributing to national 
and	local	economies.		
More	than	60%	of	our	
purchases are from local 
suppliers.		

Geoalcali	is	the	first	junior	
potash mining company 
to become a signatory to 
the UN Global Compact 
initiative.	

All our processes are 
optimised	and	have	been	
designed in alignment 
with circular economy 
principles.		

Muga is the only mining 
project in Spain that has 
undertaken	a	voluntary	
Public Participation 
Process that has been 
recognised regionally and 
nationally as a social Best 
Practice in the mining 
industry.	

18
18

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSOur Commitment to the Sustainable Development Agenda

No Poverty
Mina Muga will generate wealth 
for	several	decades	at	a	time	
of great social transformations 
in labour matters, especially in 
times	when	economies	have	
been	hit	by	Covid.	Muga	will	
generate direct  and indirect 
jobs in a highly depopulated 
region.	

Zero Hunger
The worldwide shortage of 
arable land is a real problem, 
driven	by	rapid	population	
growth and increasing demand 
for	food.	Our	Project	will	
contribute with potash for 
fertilsers,	key	for	agriculture	
and food production for 
generations	to	come	.

Gender Equality
The Group is conscious of the 
importance	of	fighting	for	
fundamental rights, dignity and 
the	value	of	the	human	person	
as well as the equal rights of 
women	and	men.	It	also	takes	
work-life	balance	measures	to	
help	achieve	equality.

Clean Water and 
Sanitation
At Muga, all of the water from 
the production process will 
be reused in the production 
process itself or eliminated by 
evaporation.

Affordable and 
Clean Energy
In	relation	to	energy	efficiency	
and minimising the impact of 
energy consumption, we are 
committed to prioritising the 
consumption of electricity 
from	renewable	sources.

Decent Work and 
Economic Growth
Muga will be one of the 
main industrial engines 
generating employment in 
the	area	and	will	provide	an	
important socio-economic 
boost, creating quality 
jobs and opening up future 
opportunities for the 
population.

Reduced 
Inequalities
We	are	committed	to	initiatives	
that promote quality education 
and	actions	that	have	an	
impact on reducing social 
inequality.	This	is	one	of	the	
cornerstones of our social 
work	through	our	Foundation.

Sustainable Cities 
and Communities
We	strive	for	greater	
sustainability and high 
performance mining by 
promoting	innovation,	research	
and	investment	in	technology	
in both extraction and product 
development.

Responsible 
Consumption and 
Production
The entire production process 
is based on sustainable 
and	optimised	criteria.	In	
addition, Geoalcali promotes 
awareness campaigns on 
responsible consumption both 
externally	and	internally.	For	
the Company, social awareness 
begins	with	the	Company	itself.

Climate Action
Environmental	protection	
and the monitoring and 
management of the 
environmental	impacts	of	our	
activities	are	fundamental	
to the Company, which 
strives	to	position	itself	as	a	
sustainable producer, including 
environmental	protection	
measures in all aspects of the 
life	cycle	of	each	Project.

Life on Land
From the outset, the Company 
has put in place the necessary 
preventive	measures	to	protect	
habitats	and	biodiversity,	
carrying	out	several	flora	and	
fauna studies to choose the 
most	suitable	location.

Partnerships for 
the Goals
Throughout the life of the 
Project,	we	will	strive	to	deliver	
on	the	key	commitments	
we	have	made	to	all	our	
stakeholders.

In addition, we will continue 
to	seek	partnerships	to	raise	
awareness and contribute to 
the	SDGs.

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS

19
19

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSGoals and Targets 

Strategic Objectives 

Strategic Objective

Material Topics

Environmental SDGs

Employee / Worker SDGs

Community / Society SDGs

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

To	secure	all	necessary	environmental,	
construction	and	operating	permits.	

1

To	build	and	to	successfully	operate	the	first	
phase	of	the	Muga	Mine	(0.5	Mtpa	MOP).

2 4 5 6

7 8

To	develop	the	plans	and	financing	for	the	second	
stage	of	the	Muga	Mine	(to	1	Mtpa	MOP).	

74

10

To	build,	operate	and	maintain	a	high	level	of	
workplace	health	and	safety.

2 5

To conduct our business with regard to all 
environmental	regulations	and	best	practice.

6

8

9

10

To	work	diligently	with	the	various	communities	
close to the mine to optimise our social 
performance and thereby secure and maintain 
support	for	our	Project.

3

5

6

7

8

11

12

To	work	with	the	various	government	departments	
and regulators in a transparent and engaging 
manner to secure their trust and enable them to 
supervise	our	activities	appropriately.

3

8

5

6

7

10

11

12

To	secure	all	necessary	funding	for	the	first	
phase	of	the	Muga	Project	and	have	plans	and	
commitments in place for the implementation of 
the	second	phase.

To	comply	fully	with	all	pertinent	legislation.

To	develop	plans	and	studies	for	the	potential	
implementation of future projects within the 
Group´s	current	tenement	holding.

2 3 5 6

8 9 13

4 5 6 8
9 10

2 3 5 6

8 9

To become the employer of choice within our 
sector	and	environment.

1

4

7

11

12

To	return	value	to	our	shareholders.

1

2

3

4

5 6 7

8

9

10

11

12

13

20
20

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSGoals and Targets 

The	SDGs	are	a	useful	framework	created	by	the	United	Nations	to	help	companies	understand	how	their	

activity	 impacts	 on	 the	 international	 Sustainable	 Development	 Agenda,	 while	 the	 UN	 Global	 Compact	

provides	a	universal	language	for	corporate	responsibility	reporting.	The	Group	believes	that	adopting	the	

UN’s	universal	language	for	corporate	responsibility	will	contribute	to	transparency	and	accountability	with	

all	its	stakeholders	and	has	aligned	its	own	strategy	to	the	SDGs	with	the	aim	of	contributing	positively	to	

the	achievement	of	these	goals.	Additionally,	the	Company	continues	to	assess	different	frameworks	in	its	

search for a globally coherent solution for sustainability disclosure standards in line with the Company’s 

progress	and	maturity.		The	Group	has	revised	its	internal	and	external	analysis	to	refine	material	topics	

relevant	 to	 the	 business	 and	 its	 stakeholders.	 This	 work	 also	 included	 a	 new	 analysis	 to	 define	 the	

interrelation	of	these	material	topics	and	their	impact	on	the	SDGs.	

Strategic Objective

Material Topics

Environmental SDGs

Employee / Worker SDGs

Community / Society SDGs

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

To	secure	all	necessary	environmental,	

construction	and	operating	permits.	

To	build	and	to	successfully	operate	the	first	

phase	of	the	Muga	Mine	(0.5	Mtpa	MOP).

To	develop	the	plans	and	financing	for	the	second	

stage	of	the	Muga	Mine	(to	1	Mtpa	MOP).	

To	build,	operate	and	maintain	a	high	level	of	

workplace	health	and	safety.

To conduct our business with regard to all 

environmental	regulations	and	best	practice.

To	work	diligently	with	the	various	communities	

close to the mine to optimise our social 

performance and thereby secure and maintain 

support	for	our	Project.

To	work	with	the	various	government	departments	

and regulators in a transparent and engaging 

manner to secure their trust and enable them to 

supervise	our	activities	appropriately.

To	secure	all	necessary	funding	for	the	first	

phase	of	the	Muga	Project	and	have	plans	and	

commitments in place for the implementation of 

the	second	phase.

To	comply	fully	with	all	pertinent	legislation.

To	develop	plans	and	studies	for	the	potential	

implementation of future projects within the 

Group´s	current	tenement	holding.

To become the employer of choice within our 

sector	and	environment.

12

To	return	value	to	our	shareholders.

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS

21
21

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSMaterial Topics

1.
Receipt of 
Necessary 
Permits

2.
Ensure Employee 
Health and Safety

3.
Governance

4.
Wealth Creation

5.
Prioritise Health 
and Safety in the 
Community

6.
Water 
Management

7.
Generation 
of Quality 
Employment

8.
Waste 
Management

9.
Restoration of the 
Area

10.
Climate Change

11.
Community 
Involvement

12.
Sustainable Local 
Development

13.
Project Feasibility

22

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSHIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS

23
23

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS2020 Highlights

Our Business

Progress in 2020

Muga	Project	engineering	and	design	progressed	significantly	in	all	areas:

 — the	mine,	including	the	declines	to	the	mineralization;

 — the processing plant and surface facilities; and

 — the	tailings	dewatering	and	backfilling	systems.

Additionally,	 purchase	 commitments	 have	 been	 made	 for	 key	 long	 lead	 items,	 notably	 the	 miner	 bolter.		

All of this progress puts the Company in a position to proceed with the Project as soon as the required 

permitting	is	granted.	The	Company	continued	engaging	with	all	permitting	authorities	although	Covid-19	

related	restrictions	in	Spain	have	made	the	process	slower	than	expected.	Another	significant	step	was	

the	appointment	 of	Endeavour	Financial	as	debt	 financial	advisor	to	help	move	 forward	with	Highfield’s	

financing	strategy.	

The	Company	adjusts	its	organization	and	timelines	as	necessary	to	respond	to	changes	in	circumstances.		

We  are  conscious  that  the  long  term  success  of  our  business  requires  changes  in  one  area  that  often 

have	 impacts	 in	 other.	 	 The	 ability	 to	 model	 asset	 and	 resource	 performance,	 identify	 alternatives,	 and	

understand	the	sensitivities	of	various	parameters	to	adjustments,	is	therefore	critical	to	achieving	our	

goals	and	ultimately	our	vision.

Muga Mine, at 
the Forefront of 
Sustainability

24

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSMuga’s waste management 
strategy has been 
carefully designed to fulfil 
the circular economy 
objectives

Analysis from a Circular Economy (CE) Perspective 

A circular economy is an economic system aimed at eliminating waste and minimising the use of resource 

inputs	 through	 a	 closed-loop	 system	 where	 waste	 materials	 become	 inputs	 for	 other	 processes.	 This	

regenerative	approach	is	in	contrast	to	the	traditional	linear	economy,	which	has	a	“take,	make,	dispose”	

model	of	production.

The	Company’s	approach	to	waste	management	has	been	considered	from	a	broad	perspective,	including	

environmental,	 social,	 and	 economic	 factors.	 Muga’s	 waste	 management	 strategy	 has	 been	 carefully	

designed	 to	 fulfil	 the	 circular	 economy	 objectives	 as	 it	 involves	 converting	 part	 of	 the	 waste	 salt	 from	

the	 potash	 production	 process	 into	 saleable	 salt	 by-products	 and	 the	 remainder	 into	 a	 backfill	 used	 to	

fill	 underground	 mining	 voids.	 	 The	 environmental	 benefits	 will	 include	 a	 substantial	 reduction	 in	 the	

storage	of	waste	on	the	surface	during	the	operations	phase,	including	an	improved	visual	impact,	and	the	

complete	elimination	of	surface	waste	by	the	close	of	operations.		The	salt	by-product	sales	will	generate	

an	additional	economic	benefit	and	allow	the	conversion	of	a	waste	product	into	a	productive	raw	material	

for	use	in	various	industries.		The	backfilling	will	provide	improved	control	of	underground	convergence	and	

minimise	the	potential	surface	subsidence,	an	additional	environmental	and	social	benefit.

Backfilling	is	the	most	recommended	strategy	for	minimising	tailings	in	the	industry.	The	dry	backfilling	

process	developed	by	the	Company	has	the	added	advantage	that	it	avoids	the	use	of	cement	as	a	binding	

additive	to	achieve	the	consistency	required	of	a	backfill.	Compared	with	wet	backfilling,	which	requires	the	

addition	of	cement,	this	means	approximately	172,000	fewer	tonnes	per	year	of	cement	being	used.	The	dry	

backfilling	also	requires	less	water	in	the	process.

The	Muga	backfilling	process	system	has	been	developed	with	K-Utec	AG	Salt	Technologies,	an	expert	in	

waste	 management	 and	 backfilling	 technology,	 whose	 vision	 is	 also	 committed	 to	 the	 new	 sustainable	

mining	paradigm.

25

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSOpportunities to Tackle Climate Change

The	Company	recognises	that	it	is	necessary	to	develop	a	carbon	mitigation	strategy	and,	in	parallel,	to	

establish the broad principles, responsibilities and practices that will be used to manage the Company’s 

climate	 change	 risk	 exposure	 from	 an	 operational,	 governance	 and	 risk	 management	 perspective.	 This	

is	in	line	with	the	principles	of	the	Environmental	and	Social	Management	Policy	embedded	in	the	Code	

of	Business	Conduct	and	Ethics.	The	approach	contributes	positively	to	the	achievement	of	a	number	of	

SDGs,	mainly	SDG	13	Climate	Action.		An	early	climate	change	risk	assessment	approach	aims	to	identify	and	

mitigate	the	potential	impacts	the	climate	change	may	have	on	the	Group’s	assets.	

An	internal	team	is	working	on	the	definition	of	a	comprehensive	risk	assessment	for	Muga’s	full	value	chain	

as	well	as	developing	a	future	roadmap	towards	carbon	neutrality.

Carbon sequestration

Greenhouse gas emissions

Figure: Initial assessment to define comprehensive strategy roadmap towards carbon neutrality

26

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSCorporate Governance as a Cornerstone for Sustainability 

The	Board	of	Directors	of	Highfield	Resources	continues	to	set	high	standards	for	the	Company’s	employees,	

officers	and	Directors.	It	is	the	Board	of	Directors’	duty	to	ensure	the	management	and	representatives	of	the	

Company’s	business	behave	in	a	manner	that	aligns	with	the	Company’s	high	standard	of	ESG	performance.	

The	Group	periodically	reviews	its	policies	and	procedures	and	suggests	changes	to	ensure	high	ethical	

standards	continue	to	be	met.	This	year	Geoalcali	became	a	signatory	to	the	Global	Compact	UN	initiative	

and therefore a natural consequence was the alignment of the policies in the Group’s Code of Business 

Conduct	and	Ethics	with	the	Sustainability	Development	Goals	as	part	of	its	commitment	to	the	international	

Sustainable	Development	Agenda.		

This	 year’s	 review	 of	 policies	 and	 procedures	 suggested	 enhancements	 in	 the	 Whistleblower	 Policy	

to	 include	 legal	 requirements	 derived	 from	 the	 Australian	 Corporations	 Act	 2001.	 The	 Company	 also	

strengthened	 its	 anti-corruption	 and	 whistleblower	 protocols	 in	 its	 Integrated	 Management	 System.	 In	

addition,	the	Group	incorporated	a	conflict	of	interest	procedure	for	managers	and	Directors,	and	launched	

a	Code	of	Business	Conduct	and	Ethics	training	programme	for	all	staff	members.	All	of	these	measures	are	

designed	to	contribute	to	transparency	and	assurance	of	the	team’s	ethical	performance.	The	Board	has	

also	recently	approved	a	Climate	Change	Risk	Management	Policy.	The	policy	sets	out	the	broad	principles,	

responsibilities	and	practices	that	will	be	used	to	manage	the	Company’s	climate	change	risk	exposure	

from	an	operational,	governance	and	risk	management	perspective.	It	is	in	line	with	the	principles	of	the	

Environmental	and	Social	Management	Policy	embedded	in	the	Code	of	Business	Conduct	and	Ethics.		The	

policy	also	contributes	positively	to	the	achievement	of	a	number	of	Sustainable	Development	Goals	(SDGs)	

notably	SDG	13	Climate	Action.

The Group periodically 
reviews its policies and 
procedures and suggests 
changes to ensure high 
ethical standards continue 
to be met.

27

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSOur Environment 

Our Performance Today

Committed to Reducing 
Our Environmental 
Impacts 

Organisations	 should	 take	 a	 lead	 in	 solving	 environmental	 issues	 and	 there	 are	 good	 financial	 reasons	

why	businesses	should	commit	to	doing	so.	There	is	therefore	an	opportunity	to	achieve	environmental	

benefits	while	also	improving	their	business	reputation	and	decreasing	costs.	The	Group	considers	that	this	

approach	has	the	potential	to	contribute	substantially	towards	government	targets,	especially	now	that	the	

European	Green	Deal	plan	is	to	make	the	EU’s	economy	more	modern,	resource-efficient	and	competitive.	

Training and Awareness: 

Since	its	inception,	the	Group	has	believed	that	environmental	awareness	campaigns	are	fundamental	so	

that	the	daily	activities	of	its	employees,	suppliers	and	consultants	are	informed	by	this	awareness.		

One	of	the	training	initiatives	during	the	year	was	a	comprehensive	training	for	all	staff	members	on	the	

requirements	of	the	environmental	permit	or	Declaración	de	Impacto	Ambiental	(DIA)	awarded	on	31	May	

2019.	Other	training	activities	included:	

 — Awareness campaign on the importance of recycling; and 

 — Celebration	of	Green	Week	to	raise	awareness	primarily	on	biodiversity	and	mining	activity	impacts.	

Environmental performance: 

The	Group	has	a	firm	commitment	to	reducing	its	environmental	impact	and	accordingly	a	set	of	indicators	

and	mechanisms	are	in	place	to	monitor	the	Company’s	performance	during	drilling	activities.		

The Company is not yet engaged in mining operations but is preparing a new set of monitoring systems 

encompassed	in	Geoalcali’s	Environmental	Monitoring	Programme.	

The Company monitors: 

 — Environmental	accidents	and	incidents;	

 — Environmental	awareness	campaigns;	

 — Water usage in mining exploration;  

 — Amount of soil disturbed and subsequently rehabilitated;  

 — Use of toxic substances in mining exploration;  

 — Energy	consumption	in	workplaces,	vehicles	and	exploration	drilling	works;	

 — Drilling	muds	generated	in	mining	exploration	work;	and	

 — Hazardous	and	non-hazardous	waste	generated	in	mining	exploration	work.	

There	were	no	significant	drilling	activities	during	2020.	

Environmental 
Grievances:

ZERO 

environmental 
incidents and 
accidents reported 
in 2020

28

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSOur Plan 

Highfield	Resources	is	committed	to	an	overall	reduction	in	our	environmental	footprint	by	creating	and	

implementing	stewardship	systems	across	our	sites,	operations	and	communities.	As	part	of	the	Mining	

Concession process the Company continued the detailed integration of the mine plan suggestions arising 

from	the	DIA.	In	parallel,	Geoalcali	continued	working	with	engineering	contractors	in	the	preparation	of	

detailed	environmental	elements	to	be	implemented	in	the	design	that	will	be	required	for	the	construction	

permit	phase.	

REDUCTION OF SPACE OCCUPIED

1

2

2

3

4

29

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSOur Community  

Our Response during the Covid-19 Pandemic

Continuing our Efforts in 
Becoming a Member of 
the Community 

The	Group	remained	committed	to	helping	external	stakeholders	during	the	Covid-19	pandemic	as	part	of	

our ongoing daily communication and consultation with the wider communities of interest (COI) in which we 

operate.		The	Group	launched	a	Stop	Covid	solidarity	initiative	comprising	donations	of	25,000	face	masks	

and	disinfectant	for	community	streets	as	well	as	cash	donations	to	frontline	associations	fighting	the	virus	

including	Red	Cross	ambulances	and	cleaning	companies.	Donations	were	made	by	Geoalcali,	the	Geoalcali	

Foundation,	and	directly	by	staff.		

“Companies have responsibilities beyond just their employees and 
shareholders. Society needs us to act with a greater involvement, 
purpose, coherence, and sense of ethics and of community in the 
problems that concern us all.”   

Richard	Crookes,	Highfield	Chairman,	speaking	at	at	#UnitingBusiness	&	CEOs	Taking	Action,	a	UN	

Covid-19	Response	Initiative.

Stop  Covid  has  managed  to  reach  more  than  eleven  towns  in  the  area  of  the  Muga  Mine,  helping  over  10,000  inhabitants  with  Personal  Protective  Equipment  donations  and 
disinfection materials.

30

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS 
Reinforcement of our Buy Local Commitment  

The	influence	of	an	organisation	on	the	local	economy	goes	beyond	the	direct	jobs	it	generates	and	the	

payment	 of	 wages	 and	 taxes.	 An	 organisation	 can	 attract	 additional	 investment	 indirectly	 for	 the	 local	

economy	 if	 it	 supports	 local	 businesses	 through	 its	 supply	 chain.	 Therefore,	 the	 Group	 reinforced	 its	

Suppliers:

commitment	with	a	Buy	Local	Policy	to	generate	a	positive	economic	impact	at	the	local	level.	This	policy	

encourages,	within	its	workforce,	as	well	as	with	contractors	and	subcontractors,	the	search	for	qualified	

local	suppliers	with	the	aim	of	contributing	to	the	development	of	a	stable	local	economy.	Currently	the	

Company	has	engaged	with	more	than	850	suppliers	with	an	overall	investment	of	over	€53	million	since	

2014,	of	which	nearly	two	thirds	have	been	Spanish	suppliers.	

The	Company	is	also	registering	interested	local	suppliers	in	its	procurement	database	which	is	checked	

when	considering	a	new	tendering	process.	This	policy	has	been	communicated	via	a	local	magazine	to	

smaller	suppliers	in	Muga’s	COI.

International          Spanish 

31

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSThe Geoalcali Foundation

The	Foundation	continued	its	activity	with	key	programmes	as	a	continuation	of	ongoing	initiatives	with	the	

communities	to	continue	its	strategic	vision	to	promote:

Quality education

The	Geoalcali	Foundation	is	very	aware	of	the	importance	of	quality	education.	This	year	the	Foundation	

supported the incorporation of the Glenn Doman Method, a pioneering teaching method for the youngest 

students.	 This	 method	 was	 implemented	 in	 Sos	 Del	 Rey	 Católico`s	 public	 nursery	 Babyteca	 which	 the	

Foundation	continues	supporting.	At	secondary	level,	the	Foundation	supported	an	inclusion	programme	

aimed	at	the	integration	of	disadvantaged	students	through	workshops	bringing	them	closer	to	the	labour	

market.	

For adults, the E-learning programme continues to be carried out in the surrounding towns of Cinco Villas 

in	Aragón,	facilitating	access	to	training	in	languages	and	digital	topics.

The Company participates in several educational initiatives to promote STEM careers and knowledge of our business.

32

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSMª José Navarro Lafita, Mayoress of Sos del Rey Católico (Aragon)

Mª	José	Navarro	Lafita	is	also	President	of	the	Mancomunidad	Altas	Cinco	Villas	(Public	Services	entity	of	

the	area).	A	teacher	by	profession,	she	is	also	Head	of	the	Educational	Programmes	Unit	of	the	Provincial	

Education,	Culture	and	Sport	Service	of	Zaragoza.	She	has	been	Mayoress	of	Sos	del	Rey	Católico	for	the	

PSOE party since 2014 and chairs the Mancomunidad Altas Cinco Villas, which brings together most of the 

town	councils	of	the	Val	D’Onsella.

LISTENING TO THE 
COMMUNITY

Can you tell us more about Sos del Rey Católico and what the arrival of Mina Muga would mean for the 

region? 

“Sos was an essential border between kingdoms and the vestiges of its history can be visibly seen in its rich 

urban, artistic and cultural heritage. It is a beautiful town that stands as an essential tourist destination and 

today struggles with the difficulties of the Covid-19 pandemic and its impact on the local economy, problems 

that are added to the already existing ones of ageing, depopulation and social alienation from rural culture. 

The arrival of Muga Mine in the region would represent an opportunity for the future of the whole area. Muga is 

currently the only major economic project in the Altas Cinco Villas region that can generate wealth and jobs, 

which are essential for the settlement of the population contributing to life projects of rural inhabitants.”

Do  you  consider  that  the  Company  is  making  sufficient  efforts  in  environmental,  social  and  good 

governance matters? 

“Yes, from the beginning of the relationship, when they personally explained the project to us at the town hall, 

I  could  appreciate  the  willingness  to  integrate  into  the  territory,  to  explain  the  characteristics  and  details 

of Muga Mina to the local authorities and the population in general. We have been regularly informed of 

the evolution of the project over time and its progress in the administrative process, with a constant 

concern to improve the project in environmental matters and opening processes of citizen participation 

to receive suggestions. 

The Company’s collaboration in local projects of general interest, through the Geoalcali Foundation, allows the 

development of socio-cultural actions that enrich the quality of life of the population.”

Mª José Navarro Lafita

Mayoress of Sos del Rey 
Católico

Communities in Aragón receive Stop Covid initiative donations.

Company´s second hand laptops donations. 

33

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSSustainable Development

Muga’s	communities	are	highly	depopulated	and	have	an	aging	population.	Nonetheless,	these	communities	

could	attract	newcomers	if	general	services	were	improved.	The	Foundation	has	participated	in	initiatives	

to	 improve	 mobility	 of	 neighbours	 in	 terms	 of	 accessibility	 and	 safety.	 The	 Foundation	 has	 promoted	 a	

transport	service	in	Undués	de	Lerda	to	facilitate	mobility	of	residents	around	nearby	towns.	This	transport	

service	makes	it	easier	for	children	to	travel	to	schools	in	other	towns,	and	for	the	villagers,	especially	the	

older	ones,	to	go	to	neighbouring	towns	to	do	their	shopping	or	their	medical	visits.

The	Foundation	has	actively	participated	in	various	initiatives	throughout	Muga’s	COI,	many	of	which	have	

received	awards	and	recognitions	as	sustainable	initiatives.			

Juan Arboniés, Mayor of Undués de Lerda (Aragon)

LISTENING TO THE 
COMMUNITY

Undués	 de	 Lerda	 maintains	 its	 medieval	 character	 intact.	 Its	 cobbled	 streets	 and	 houses	 ooze	 history.	

Today,	there	are	barely	more	than	fifty	residents,	a	number	that	has	been	much	lower,	but	which	has	been	

maintained	thanks	to	the	efforts	of	neighbours	such	as	its	current	mayor,	Juan	Arboniés.

Do you consider the Company is doing all the necessary to engage with the community?

“I understand that the Company is undertaking efforts in this, but I think it’s never enough, especially concerning 

is the fact that it takes so long for the Muga Project to get underway.”

In your opinion, what will Muga signify to this region? 

“Due to the depopulation that dates to the 60s, this region is doomed to disappear, which is why the Muga Mine 

gives hope because of the creation of jobs and therefore the renaissance of the villages in this region. 

This will help reverse things done incorrectly and return to the situation before the 60s.”

34

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSRicardo Murillo Delfa, Mayor of Liédena (Navarra)

Liédena	is	one	of	the	most	important	villages	of	Muga’s	COI	with	around	300	inhabitants.	In	recent	years,	

Liédena	has	recovered	waste	deposit	areas	and	converted	them	into	recreation	sites,	such	as	the	Mirador	

de	la	Súbita,	and	has	promoted	leisure	activities	that	are	difficult	to	find	in	larger	towns.	Much	of	the	credit	

goes	to	its	current	mayor,	Ricardo	Murillo,	a	lover	of	his	town.

LISTENING TO THE 
COMMUNITY

How has Geoalcali helped this community? 

“Speaking locally as Liédena Town Council, through the Geoalcali Foundation, we initially had great help with 

an environmental recovery project (let’s hope that all the permits and times go well so that everything follows 

its course and that the Geoalcali Foundation supports another large-scale project such as the one mentioned 

above).  The  Geoalcali  Foundation  and  the  Council  of  Liédena  have  always  been  collaborating  in  different 

smaller  projects  of  different  kinds  such  as  social  projects,  in  support  of  the  problem  of  depopulation,  the 

elderly, cultural projects, etc. with which both the Council of Liédena and the Geoalcali Foundation have won 

awards and recognition for these projects.”

Mayor of Liédena receives desinfectant product donation.

Ricardo Murillo

Mayor of Liédena

“I think Muga Mine could 
be a project that attracts 
newcomers to this area 
and therefore services. As 
with any major project of 
this magnitude, it is logical 
and necessary to have all 
the guarantees, and we 
know from information 
both in person and by 
correspondence that 
this is being carried out 
with all the requirements 
requested by the 
Administration.”

35

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSLISTENING TO THE 
COMMUNITY

Mª Eugenia Pérez, President of the Council of Rocaforte (Navarra)

María Eugenia is at the head of this small town in the region of Sangüesa which, according to many, is a 

treasure	trove	for	history	lovers.	This	council	of	barely	40	inhabitants	is	an	unmissable	rendezvous	with	the	

origins	and	splendour	of	the	Old	Kingdom	of	Navarre.	In	Rocaforte	is	the	Hermitage	of	Saint	Bartholomew,	

in whose restoration the Geoalcali Foundation collaborated, and within its cobbled walls a small children’s 

playground has been built, also with the help of the Foundation, a symbol of the future to which the head of 

this	beautiful	corner	of	Navarre	looks	with	optimism.

What would the arrival of Mina Muga in the region mean?

“An  important  socio-economic  boost  that  opens  up  future  opportunities  for  the  Sanguesa  region  and 

will  lead,  among  other  things,  to  the  creation  of  many  jobs  and  the  settling  of  the  population.  Geoalcali  is 

also  committed  to  and  collaborates  with  programmes  aligned  with  educational  quality,  social  integration, 

sustainable communities and the environment managed by local entities.”

Do  you  consider  that  the  Company  makes  sufficient  efforts  in  terms  of  environmental  protection  and 

community involvement?

“The  Company’s  obtaining  of  the  different  administrative  authorisations  for  the  opening  of  the  mine  is  a 

guarantee of safety and rigorous compliance with environmental and protection regulations. In addition, the 

Company has always reiterated its commitment to the environment and sustainability.”

Rocaforte receives facemasks and desinfectant for the village streets. 

36

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSEntrepreneurship

The	Geoalcali	Foundation	has	actively	participated	in	the	Entrepeneurial	Programme	of	CEIN,	a	Navarra	

public	 entity	 to	 boost	 entrepreneurship.	 During	 the	 programme,	 seven	 entrepeneurs	 where	 mentored,	

providing	them	with	all	the	tools	and	appropriate	training	aimed	at	each	one	of	them	to	turn	their	initial	idea	

of	a	“future	business”	into	a	real	and	viable	project.

CEIN´s Entrepreneurial Programme launch event. 

37

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSKnowledge of our business

The	Geoalcali	Foundation	has	participated	in	the	European	Heritage	Days	by	giving	a	talk	on	mining	heritage	

and	creating	the	network	of	Organik	Gardens.	The	first	one	has	been	installed	in	the	town	of	Javier.	Through	

it,	the	properties	of	potash	and	the	importance	of	the	consumption	of	local	products	has	been	explained.	All	

the	local	residents	are	involved	in	the	maintenance	of	the	garden.

The	Company	also	sent	an	anonymous	survey	to	key	leaders	of	Muga’s	COI	to	understand	how	the	Company	

is	perceived	in	the	community	with	regards	to	its	sustainable	approach.

Results	 from	 this	 survey	 show	 that	 communities	 are	 interested	 in	 learning	 more	 about	 the	 Group’s	

performance.	 Community	 leaders	 also	 ranked	 material	 topics	 expressing	 special	 interest	 in	 Quality	 Job	

Creation	and	also	Safety	and	Wealth	Creation.

LISTENING TO THE 
COMMUNITY

ZERO 

Grievances 
Reported

Are you interested 
in learning about 
our commitment to 
sustainability and our 
performance?

How would you rate 
the company’s efforts 
to engage with the 
community?

No             Yes

Positive									Negative									Neutral

38

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSOrganiK Garden of Javier.

3939

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSOur People 

The	Group	is	conscious	of	the	importance	of	creating	a	work	environment	where	employees	feel	valued,	

respected	and	engaged.	During	this	particularly	strange	time	of	a	pandemic,	the	Company	has	continued	

to	 reinforce	 the	 relevance	 of	 its	 “Living	 Values”	 programme	 with	 the	 objective	 that	 our	 core	 values	 of	

Commitment,	Respect,	Excellence	and	Attitude	serve	as	a	guide	in	a	difficult	situation.	Connected	remotely	

by	our	on	line	communication	systems,	all	staff	participated	in	different	activities	with	the	aim	of	increasing	

teambuilding	and	resilience.		

The	Geoalcali	team	showed	special	sensitivity	by	making	personal	contributions	to	solidarity	causes	to	help	

communities	and	frontline	workers	fight	the	battle	against	Covid-19.	

Safety Always First

At	 a	 very	 early	 stage,	 when	 Covid-19	 cases	 were	 being	 reported	 from	 Italy,	 the	 Company	 established	

a	 subcommittee	 of	 its	 crisis	 management	 team	 to	 meet	 regularly	 and	 to	 proactively	 enact	 health	 and	

safety	measures	and	inform	the	workforce.	An	action	protocol	was	implemented	before	the	Spanish	lock	

down	 began,	 in	 order	 to	 prevent	 contagion.	 This	 protocol	 is	 a	 living	 document	 continuously	 updated	 as	

the	 pandemic	 progresses.	 The	 Company	 provided	 the	 necessary	 materials	 to	 all	 workers	 to	 prevent	

Covid-19	outbreaks.	In	addition,	the	entire	workforce	has	been	trained	and	informed	about	the	risks	of	the	

coronavirus,	ways	the	contagion	spreads,	symptoms	and	methods	of	prevention.	The	office	was	adapted	

for	a	return	to	work	in	July	in	safe	conditions	to	prevent	an	outbreak	within	the	team.	To	date,	the	Company	

has	not	suffered	any	outbreak.

The	Company	successfully	completed	a	programme	for	an	improved	preventive	safety	culture	based	on	

“Human	and	Organisational	Performance	(HOP)”	delivered	by	Prevencontrol,	that	started	in	2019.

There	were	no	accidents	related	to	the	work	activities	of	either	our	own	staff	or	contractors.	There	was	only	

one	minor	incident	of	a	fall	from	a	bicycle	on	the	way	home	from	work,	which	required	medical	assistance	

from	a	local	healthcare	clinic,	but	was	classified	as	a	minor	incident	without	sick	leave.

Enhanced safety measures in the Muga Project

The	 team	 continuously	 supervises	 the	 construction	 execution	 plan	 that	 is	 being	 drawn	 up	 with	

the	 help	 of	 engineering/consulting	 firms,	 to	 check	 that	 all	 the	 health	 and	 safety	 standards	 and	

regulations	are	being	complied	with,	and	to	provide	workers	with	a	safe	environment	and	ensure	

that	accident-free	activity	can	be	carried	out	in	the	mine’s	operational	phase.	

In	addition,	coinciding	with	the	last	months	of	the	detailed	engineering	development	phase,	a	Health	

and	Safety	Coordinator	has	been	hired,	in	accordance	with	the	Spanish	mandate	RD	1627/1997,	to	

coordinate	health	and	safety	matters	with	all	the	engineering	companies	involved	in	the	design,	

in order to plan the construction of the project with high safety standards, in compliance with the 

regulations.

Cultivating Human Capital

40

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSA Digital Office

The	Group	maintained	productivity	and	prioritised	health	and	safety	during	all	phases	of	the	pandemic.	The	

corporate	offices	were	originally	set	up	with	a	high	level	of	digitalisation	taking	into	account	the	nature	

of	the	team’s	work.	As	such,	the	Company	was	able	to	operate	remotely	ahead	of	the	general	alarm	and	

lockdown	being	raised	in	Spain	on	14	March	2020.

Continuing our effort in Work-Life Balance and Diversity 
Inclusion

As	part	of	the	Company’s	vision	of	working	towards	inclusiveness	in	the	workforce,	it	has	defined	a	work-

life	balance	plan	to	be	implemented	in	2021.	Geoalcali’s	commitment	to	a	good	work-life	balance,	which	

comprises	work,	family	and	personal	life	has	enabled	the	Company	to	renew	permanently	the	Reconcilia	

Seal,	promoted	by	the	Association	of	Women	Entrepreneurs	and	Managers	of	Navarra	(AMEDNA).

Number of Employees

“A positive team culture 
and attitudes have allowed 
us to survive and flourish 
in this unusual but difficult 
work environment thus 
maintaining efficiency and 
productivity.”

Richard Crookes

Chairman of Highfield 
Resources 

(Interim CEO at the time the 
Covid-19 crisis was declared)

Year

2019

2020

Female

13

12

Male

22

23

Employee Hire and Turnover

During	2020	four	employees	left	the	Company	and	four	new	team	members	have	joined.

ESG Training 

The	 Group	 is	 conscious	 that	 considerating	 ESG	 matters	 will	 help	 prevent	 risks	 in	 the	 short	 term	 whilst	

raising	awareness	on	risks	facing	business	and	society	in	the	long	term.	The	Company	organised	a	training	

course to increase awareness on all the Company’s policies comprised in the Code of Ethics and Business 

Conduct.	 Additionally,	 the	 Company	 organised	 a	 session	 to	 explain	 the	 main	 sustainability	 megatrends	

that	affect	the	mining	sector	and	how	to	take	action	in	the	achievement	of	the	SDGs	and	the	Sustainable	

Development	Agenda.	The	EU	has	stated	that	its	main	sustainability	challenge	for	the	coming	decade	is	to	

decouple	its	economic	development	from	environmental	degradation	and	overcome	the	remaining	social	

inequalities.	The	EU	aims	to	be	a	global	trailblazer	in	the	sustainability	transition	and	set	the	bar	high	for	a	

green	and	inclusive	economy	as	expressed	in	its	ambitious	European	Green	Deal.

41

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS 
42
42

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSDirectors’ Report

The	 Directors	 present	 their	 report	 for	 Highfield	 Resources	 Limited	

(“Highfield	Resources”,	“Highfield”,	or	“the	Company”)	and	its	subsidiaries	

(“the	Group”)	for	the	financial	year	ended	31	December	2020.

Directors

Board Committees

Interests in the Securities of the Company

Results of Operations

Dividends

Corporate Structure

Nature	of	Operations	and	Principal	Activities

Review	of	Operations

Geoalcali Foundation

Corporate

Annual	Review	of	Ore	Reserves	and	Mineral	Resources

Corporate	Governance	–	Mineral	Resource	and	Ore	
Reserve	Calculations

Significant	Changes	in	the	State	of	Affairs

Significant	Events	After	the	Reporting	Date

Likely	Developments	and	Expected	Results	of	
Operations

Environmental	Regulations	and	Performance

Share Options

Indemnification	and	Insurance	of	Directors	and	
Officers

Directors’ Meetings

Proceedings on Behalf of the Company

Corporate	Governance

Auditor	Independence	and	Non-Audit	Services

Audited Remuneration Report

43

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSDirectors

The	names,	qualifications	and	experience	of	the	Company’s	Directors	in	office	during	the	period	and	until	

the	date	of	this	report	are	as	follows.	Directors	were	in	office	for	the	entire	period	unless	otherwise	stated.

Mr. Richard Crookes

Independent Non-Executive Chairman (and Acting Chief Executive Officer from 1 February to 20 July 

2020), BSc (Geology), Grad Dip Applied Finance

Mr.	Crookes	has	over	30	years’	experience	in	the	resources	and	investments	industries.	He	is	a	geologist	by	

training	having	worked	in	the	industry	most	recently	as	the	Chief	Geologist	and	Mining	Manager	of	Ernest	

Henry	Mining	in	Australia	(now	Glencore).	Mr.	Crookes	most	recently	spent	six	years	with	EMR	Capital	as	an	

Investment	Director	and	prior	to	that,	12	years	as	an	Executive	Director	in	Macquarie	Bank’s	Metals	Energy	

Capital	 (MEC)	 Division	 where	 he	 managed	 all	 aspects	 of	 the	 Bank’s	 principal	 investments	 in	 mining	 and	

metals	companies	as	well	as	the	origination	of	numerous	Project	Finance	transactions.	Mr.	Crookes	has	

extensive	 experience	 in	 funds	 management,	 deal	 origination,	 evaluation,	 structuring,	 and	 execution	 of	

investment	entry	and	exits	for	both	private	and	public	resources	companies	in	Australia	and	overseas.	In	

the	three	years	immediately	before	the	end	of	the	financial	year,	Mr.	Crookes	held	two	other	directorships	of	

listed	companies	(Chairman	Black	Rock	Mining	Ltd	BKT:ASX,	since	October	2017;	Executive	Director	Lithium	

Power	International	Ltd	LPI:ASX,	since	October	2018). 

Mr. Peter Albert (resigned 31 January 2020)

Former Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer, BSc (Hons), EMBA, FAusIMM, MIOM3, CEng 

Mr.	Albert	is	a	metallurgist	and	chartered	engineer	and	has	over	30	years’	experience	in	project	management,	

general management and operations management in mining and minerals processing in Australia, Africa 

and	Asia.

Before	joining	the	Company,	Mr.	Albert	held	CEO	roles	with	two	Hong	Kong	listed	organisations,	Jinchuan	

Group	 International	 Resources	 Company	 and	 G-Resources	 Group.	 He	 has	 held	 leadership	 and	 senior	

executive	roles	with	OZ	Minerals	Limited,	Oxiana	Limited,	Shell-Billiton	(Australia),	Aker	Kvaerner	(Australia)	

and	 Johannesburg	 Consolidated	 Investments	 (South	 Africa).	 In	 the	 three	 years	 immediately	 before	 his	

resignation,	Mr.	Albert	held	no	other	directorships	of	any	listed	companies.

44

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSMs. Pauline Carr

Independent Non-Executive Director, BEcon, MBA, FAICD, FCIS, FGIA

Ms.	Carr	has	over	30	years’	commercial	experience	in	management,	corporate	governance	and	compliance,	

mergers	and	acquisitions,	investor	and	stakeholder	relations	and	corporate	restructures.	She	trained	as	

an	accountant	and	currently	is	a	professional	non-executive	director	and	provides	business	improvement,	

compliance,	 risk	 management,	 project	 management	 and	 corporate	 governance	 solutions	 to	 executive	

management	teams.	Prior	to	this,	Ms.	Carr	held	senior	positions	with	Newmont	Asia	Pacific	and	ASX	listed	

Normandy	Mining	Limited	and	worked	for	a	number	of	years	in	the	oil	and	gas	sector	with	Exxon	Mobil.	

She	sits	on	several	Boards	and	is	Chancellor	of	the	University	of	South	Australia.	She	is	also	Chairman	of	

National	Pharmacies	Limited	and	the	South	Australian	Minerals	and	Energy	Advisory	Council.	In	the	three	

years	immediately	before	the	end	of	the	financial	year,	Ms.	Carr	held	no	other	directorships	of	any	listed	

companies. 

Mr. Roger Davey

Independent Non-Executive Director, ACSM, MSc., C.Eng., Eur.Ing., MIMMM

Mr.	 Davey	 is	 currently	 a	 Non-Executive	 Director	 of	 a	 number	 of	 mining	 companies	 in	 the	 junior	 mining	

sector.	

He	is	a	Chartered	Mining	Engineer	with	over	45	years’	experience	in	the	international	mining	industry.		Up	

to December 2010, he was an Assistant Director and the Senior Mining Engineer at N M Rothschild (London) 

in	the	Mining	and	Metals	project	finance	team,	where	for	13	years	he	was	responsible	for	the	assessment	of	

the	technical	risk	associated	with	all	the	current	and	prospective	project	loans.		Prior	to	this	his	experience	

covered	 the	 financing,	 development	 and	 operation	 of	 both	 underground	 and	 surface	 mining	 operations	

in	gold	and	base	metals	at	senior	management	and	director	level	in	South	America,	Africa	and	the	United	

Kingdom.		He	is	fluent	in	Spanish.

His	 previous	 positions	 include	 Director,	 Vice	 president	 and	 General	 Manager	 of	 Minorco	 (AngloGold)	

subsidiaries	 in	 Argentina	 (1994	 -	 1997),	 where	 he	 had	 responsibility	 for	 the	 development	 of	 the	 Cerro	

Vanguardia	 open	 pit	 gold-silver	 mine	 in	 Patagonia;	 Operations	 Director	 of	 Greenwich	 Resources	 plc,	

London	 (1984	 -	 1992),	 with	 gold	 interests	 in	 Venezuela,	 Sudan,	 Egypt	 and	 Australia;	 Production	 Manager	

for	Blue	Circle	Industries	in	Chile	(1979	-	1984);	and	various	production	roles	from	graduate	trainee	to	mine	

manager,	in	Gold	Fields	of	South	Africa	(1971	-	1978).

Mr.	Davey	is	a	graduate	of	the	Camborne	School	of	Mines,	England	and	holds	a	Master	of	Science	degree	

in	Mineral	Production	Management	from	Imperial	College,	London	University.		He	is	a	Chartered	Engineer	

(C.Eng.),	a	European	Engineer	(Eur.	Ing.)	and	a	Member	of	the	Institute	of	Materials,	Minerals	and	Mining	

(MIMMM).	 In	 the	 three	 years	 immediately	 before	 the	 end	 of	 the	 financial	 year,	 Mr.	 Davey	 held	 no	 other	

directorships	of	any	Australian	listed	companies.

45

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSMr. Jim Dietz (retired 18 February 2021)

Independent Non-Executive Director, B.Eng (Chem), M.Eng (Chem)

Mr.	Dietz	has	over	42	years’	experience	in	the	fertiliser,	chemical	and	petroleum	industries,	primarily	in	

senior	operational	roles.	From	2000	until	2010,	he	was	Chief	Operating	Officer	of	Potash	Corporation	of	

Saskatchewan	(“PotashCorp”),	the	world’s	largest	fertiliser	company.		Prior	to	that	position,	Mr.	Dietz	held	a	

variety	of	other	senior	management	roles,	including	President	of	Nitrogen,	during	his	17	year	career	with	

PotashCorp.		During	that	time,	Mr.	Dietz	was	responsible	for	global	operations	as	well	as	Safety,	Health,	

and	Environment	performance	and	Procurement.	Mr.	Dietz	also	represented	PotashCorp	on	the	Board	of	

Directors	of	Arab	Potash	Company.	Mr.	Dietz	is	a	Chemical	Engineer	and	holds	both	a	Masters	and	Bachelors	

designation	from	the	Ohio	State	University.	In	the	three	years	immediately	before	the	end	of	the	financial	

year,	Mr.	Dietz	held	no	other	directorships	of	any	listed	companies

Mr. Brian Jamieson

Non-Executive Director, FCA, FAICD

Mr.	 Jamieson	 has	 over	 40	 years’	 experience	 in	 the	 advisory,	 manufacturing,	 resources	 and	 technology	

industries	in	Australia	and	offshore.  

Mr.	Jamieson	was	a	Non-Executive	Director	of	ASX	listed	Oxiana/OZ	Minerals	Limited	from	2005	to	2015	

and	served	as	Chairman	of	Audit	Risk	and	Compliance,	Nomination	and	Remuneration,	and	Due	Diligence	

Committees. 	He	was	a	Non-Executive	Director	of	Tatts	Group	Limited	from	2005	to	December	2017	and	

served	 as	 the	 Chairman	 of	 Audit	 and	 Risk	 Committee,	 Chairman	 of	 the	 Due	 Diligence	 Committee	 and	

member	of	the	Remuneration	Committee. 	Mr.	Jamieson	is	a	Non-Executive	Director	of	IODM	Limited,	Non-

Executive	Chairman	of	ASX	listed	Energy	Technologies	Limited.,	and	a	Director	of	the	Bionics	Institute	of	

Australia. 

Mr.	 Jamieson	 was	 Chief	 Executive	 of	 Minter	 Ellison	 Melbourne	 from	 2002-2005.  	 Prior	 to	 joining	 Minter	

Ellison,	Mr.	Jamieson	was	Chief	Executive	Officer	at	KPMG	Australia	from	1998-2000,	Managing	Partner	of	

KPMG	Melbourne	and	Southern	Regions	from	1993-1998	and	Chairman	of	KPMG	Melbourne	from	2001-2002. 	

Prior	to	the	merger	of	Touche	Ross	&	Co	and	Peat	Marwick	Hungerfords	to	form	KPMG,	Mr.	Jamieson	was	

the	Managing	Partner	for	Australia	for	Touche	Ross	&	Co. 

He	has	over	30	years’	experience	in	providing	advisory	and	audit	services	to	a	diverse	range	of	public	and	

large	private	companies. 	He	is	also	a	Fellow	of	the	Institute	of	Chartered	Accountants	in	Australia	and	

New	Zealand	and	a	Fellow	of	the	Australian	Institute	of	Company	Directors. 	In	the	three	years	immediately	

before	the	end	of	the	financial	year,	Mr.	Jamieson	held	two	other	directorships	of	listed	companies.	He	was	

Chairman of ASX listed Mesoblast Limited until 31 March 2019 and ASX Listed Sigma Healthcare Limited 

until	May	2019. 

46

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSMr. Isaac Querub

Independent Non-Executive Director, BA (Administration) BA (Law) 

Mr.	Querub	was	an	advisor	to	both	the	Company	and	its	wholly	owned	Spanish	subsidiary,	Geoalcali,	from	

September	2017	until	joining	the	Board	on	5	April	2018.	

He	is	one	of	Spain’s	most	senior	commodities	professionals	and	has	a	successful	track	record	as	a	global	

mining	executive	and	over	35	years’	experience	in	the	sector.	He	was	Chief	Executive	Officer	of	Glencore	

in	Spain	for	over	14	years	representing	Glencore	in	negotiations	which	resulted	in	important	transactions	

and	acquisitions	over	more	than	20	years.	He	led	Glencore	in	transactions	throughout	Africa	and	Spain	as	

well	as	representing	the	Company	on	the	Board	of	Asturiana	del	Zinc,	a	major	Spanish	zinc	producer.	More	

recently	he	was	Chief	Executive	Officer	of	EMED,	now	Atalaya,	which	operates	the	former	Rio	Tinto	copper	

mine	located	in	southern	Spain.

Mr.	Querub	has	a	degree	in	Business	Administration	and	a	degree	in	Law,	both	from	ICADE	-	Universidad	

Pontificia	de	Comillas,	Madrid.	He	is	currently	active	on	a	number	of	not-for-profit	Boards	as	well	as	having	

extensive	experience	in	the	international	marketing	of	mineral,	crude	and	oil	products.

COMPANY SECRETARY

Ms. Katelyn Adams (appointed 8 February 2021)

B.COM (Acc/Fin), CA

Ms.	 Adams	 is	 a	 partner	 of	 HLB	 Mann	 Judd,	 with	 over	 10	 years	 of	 accounting	 and	 company	 secretarial	

experience,	 servicing	 predominantly	 ASX	 listed	 companies.	 She	 has	 extensive	 knowledge	 in	 company	

secretarial duties, ASX Listing Rule requirements, IPO and capital raising processes, as well as a strong 

technical	accounting	knowledge.

Ms.	 Adams	 is	 presently	 the	 Company	 Secretary	 of	 Duxton	 Water	 Limited	 and	 Duxton	 Broadacre	 Farms	

Limited.

Mr. Donald Stephens (retired 8 February 2021)

BA (Acc), CA

Mr.	Stephens	has	over	25	years’	experience	in	the	accounting,	mining	and	services	industries,	including	14	

years	as	a	partner	of	HLB	Mann	Judd	(SA),	a	firm	of	Chartered	Accountants.		He	is	a	Chartered	Accountant	

and	corporate	adviser	specialising	in	small	cap	ASX	listed	entities.

Mr.	 Stephens	 is	 a	 director	 of	 Petratherm	 Limited.	 Additionally,	 he	 is	 Company	 Secretary	 of	 Petratherm	

Limited	 and	 various	 other	 unlisted	 public	 companies.	 Mr.	 Stephens	 is	 a	 former	 director	 of	 Odin	 Metals	

Limited (formerly Lawson Gold Limited) (resigned February 2018), Mithril Resources Ltd (resigned May 2019) 

and	Gooroo	Ventures	Limited	(resigned	January	2020).

47

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSBoard Committees

Remuneration and Nomination Committee 

The	 principal	 purpose	 of	 the	 Committee	 is	 to	 assist	 the	 Board	 in	 fulfilling	 its	 governance	 and	 oversight	

responsibilities in relation to remuneration practices so that they:

 — Link	rewards	to	the	creation	of	value	for	shareholders;

 — Facilitate operational excellence by attracting and retaining talent;

 — Fairly	 and	 responsibly	 reward	 individuals	 having	 regard	 to	 individual	 and	 Highfield	 targets	 and	

performance as well as industry remuneration conditions; and

 — Comply	with	applicable	regulatory	obligations.

In	 addition,	 the	 Committee	 oversees	 selected	 nomination	 activities	 so	 that	 boards	 within	 the	 Highfield	

Group	comprise	individuals	who	are	best	able	to	discharge	the	responsibilities	of	directors	having	regard	to	

the	law	and	excellence	in	governance	standards.

The	members	of	the	Remuneration	and	Nomination	Committee	are	Ms.	Pauline	Carr	(Chairman),	Mr.	Richard	

Crookes	 and	 Mr.	 Roger	 Davey.  	 Mr.	 Davey	 joined	 the	 Committee	 effective	 18	 February	 2021	 following	 the	

retirement	of	Mr.	Jim	Dietz. 

Audit, Business Risk and Compliance 
Committee 

The	 principal	 purpose	 of	 the	 Committee	 is	 to	 assist	 the	 Board	 in	 fulfilling	 its	 governance	 and	 oversight	

responsibilities relating to:

 — The	integrity	of	financial	accounting	practices	and	reporting;

 — Risk	management;

 — Internal	control	framework	and	internal	audit;

 — External audit function; and

 — Compliance	 with	 the	 Corporations	 Act,	 ASX	 Listing	 Rules	 and	 the	 ASX	 Corporate	 Governance	 and	

Principles.

The	members	of	the	Audit,	Business	Risk	and	Compliance	Committee	are	Ms.	Pauline	Carr	(Chairman),	Mr.	

Brian	Jamieson	and	Mr.	Roger	Davey.

48

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSInterests in the Securities of the Company

As	at	the	date	of	this	report,	the	interests	of	the	Directors	in	the	securities	of	Highfield	Resources	Limited	are:

Director

Richard Crookes 

Pauline Carr 

Roger Davey 

Brian Jamieson 

Isaac Querub 

Ordinary Shares

Options – exercisable at $0.81 
each on or before 30 Jun 2023

Options – exercisable at $0.83 
each on or before 30 Jun 2022

Options – exercisable at $1.29 
each on or before 30 Jun 2021

17,295 

42,871 

9,251 

9,251 

8,044 

1,000,000 

1,000,000 

1,000,000 

1,000,000 

1,000,000 

1,000,000 

- 

- 

- 

- 

-

-

1,000,000

1,000,000

1,000,000

Results of Operations

The	Company’s	net	loss	after	taxation	attributable	to	the	members	of	Highfield	Resources	Limited	for	the	financial	year	ended	31	December	2020	was	

$24,390,718	(year	ended	31	December	2019:	$7,526,084).

Dividends

No	dividend	was	paid	or	declared	by	the	Company	during	the	financial	year	and	up	to	the	date	of	this	report.

Corporate Structure

Highfield	Resources	Limited	is	a	company	limited	by	shares,	which	is	incorporated	and	domiciled	in	Australia.	Through	its	100%	owned	subsidiary,	

KCL	Resources	Limited,	Highfield	owns	100%	of	Geoalcali	SLU	(“Geoalcali”),	a	Spanish	incorporated	company	which	hold	the	Group’s	three	exploration	

projects.

Nature of Operations and Principal 
Activities

The	principal	activity	of	the	Company	during	the	financial	year	was	mineral	exploration	and	progressing	its	flagship	Muga	Project.

49

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSReview of Operations

Muga Project and Vipasca Project 

The	Company’s	flagship	Muga	Project	is	targeting	the	relatively	shallow	sylvinite	beds	in	the	Muga	Project	

area	that	covers	about	60km2.	Mining	is	planned	to	commence	at	a	depth	of	approximately	350	metres	from	

surface	and	is	therefore	ideal	for	a	relatively	low	cost	conventional	mine	accessed	via	a	dual	decline.

The	Muga	Project	Update	in	October	2018	confirmed	the	strategic	importance	of	Vipasca	as	a	potential	

extension	of	the	Muga	Project.	The	Vipasca	permit,	which	covers	approximately	14km2, is reported with the 

Muga	Project.	The	Vipasca	permit	is	highly	prospective	for	economic	potash	mineralisation,	with	a	primary	

focus	on	the	deeper,	higher	grade,	P1	and	P2	potash	horizons.

As	reported	in	its	June	Quarterly	Activities	Report	of	21	July	2020,	the	Company	released	assay	analysis	

for	holes	V18-03	and	V18-05	at	Vipasca.	The	assay	results	for	these	holes	were	positive	and	confirmed	the	

presence	of	potash	at	good	grades.	Hole	V18-03	confirmed	that	the	mineralisation	remains	open	towards	the	

west	of	Vipasca.	Specifically,	V18-03	intersected	a	total	of	30.2	metres	of	potash	mineralisation	including:

 — 1.5	metres	at	an	average	grade	of	11.98%	K2O from 1,022 metres;

 — 1.8	metres	at	an	average	grade	of	11.29%	K2O from 1,060 metres; and

 — 1.5	metres	at	an	average	grade	of	12.79%	K2O	from	1,070	metres.

V18-05	confirmed	the	extension	and	continuity	of	the	potash	mineralisation	between	the	Muga	Project	and	

Vipasca	thereby	linking	these	two	projects.

In	January	2021,	based	on	evaluation	of	the	results	of	hole	V18-04	drilled	in	2019,	Geoalcali	relinquished	

the	 least	 prospective	 44	 mining	 squares	 within	 the	 Vipasca	 permit	 area,	 out	 of	 the	 previous	 total	 of	 91	

mining	 squares.	 The	 results	 indicated	 that	 after	 drilling	 860	 metres,	 the	 hole	 had	 not	 intersected,	 nor	

shown	evidence	of	being	near,	the	evaporite	unit,	suggesting	that	the	potash	unit	is	situated	at	a	depth	of	

more	than	1,100	metres.		The	decision	was	therefore	taken	to	relinquish	the	western	and	central	sectors	of	

the	Vipasca	permit.		Efforts	will	now	be	concentrated	on	defining	a	maiden	Mineral	Resource	and	an	Ore	

Reserve	in	the	more	prospective	eastern	part	of	the	permit,	with	the	objective	of	integrating	Vipasca	as	an	

extension	to	the	Muga	Mining	Concession.

On	30	June	2020,	Geoalcali	received	the	exploration	permit	for	the	Muga	Sur	permit	area	which	abuts	the	

south	part	of	the	Muga	Project	area.

In	December	2020,	drill	hole	J14-09	was	completed	at	P.I.	Muga	permit	area,	which	also	abuts	the	Muga	

Project	area.	The	results	of	this	drill	hole	will	be	published	once	the	assay	analysis	is	complete.

The	 Company	 has	 prepared	 an	 updated	 MRE	 as	 at	 31	 December	 2020	 which	 has	 been	 audited	 by	 SRK	

Consulting	UK	Ltd.	Refer	to	the	ASX	Additional	Information	section	of	this	report	for	full	details,	starting	on	

page	125.	The	changes	in	the	updated	MRE	are	not	expected	to	have	any	material	impact	on	the	Muga	Ore	

Reserves	or	the	current	mine	plan.

Highfield Resources 
Limited is a potash 
company listed on the 
Australian Securities 
Exchange with three 100% 
owned potash projects 
located in Spain´s potash 
producing Ebro Basin. 

50

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSMUGA-VIPASCA
Lumbier

NA-150

N-240

Río Irati

NA-127

VIPASCA

Rocaforte
NA-132

Sangüesa

NA-534

Río A ra g ó n

SCALE
0 km

LEGEND

r

a

z

a

l

a

R í o   S

Yesa

GOYO

N A - 5 4 1 0

GOYO SUR

NA-127

MUGA

MUGA SUR
Río Onsella

NAVARRA

ARAGÓN

N-240

EMBALSE DE YESA
FRONTERIZO

Undués de Lerda

PI MUGA

Ruesta

MOLINERAS II
Río Regal

MOLINERAS I

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

NAME

Permit name

Licence Granted

National Highways

Project Delimitation

Licence Pending

Border Navarra - Aragón

51

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSMuga Project Approvals Process

As	reported	on	6	June	2019,	the	Company	received	a	positive	Declaración	de	Impacto	Ambiental	(“DIA”),	the	

key	environmental	permit	in	respect	of	the	Muga	Project.  

The	 next	 step	 in	 the	 permitting	 process	 was	 completed	 on	 13	 March	 2020	 with	 the	 submission	 of	 key	

Mining	Concession	documentation,	following	extensive	engagement	with	the	relevant	mining	authorities	in	

Madrid,	Aragon,	and	Navarra.	Submission	of	this	documentation	coincided	with	the	initiation	by	the	Spanish	

Government	of	a	nationwide	State	of	Alarm	and	confinement	programme	due	to	the	impact	of	Covid-19.	

With	both	the	Company’s	employees	and	government	officials	working	from	home,	the	Company	continued	

engagement	with	all	key	authorities	working	on	the	Mining	Concession.  

Soon	 after	 the	 Covid-19	 State	 of	 Alarm	 was	 lifted	 on	 22	 June	 2020,	 the	 start	 of	 the	 public	 consultation	

period with respect to the Mining Concession documentation was published in the National Bulletin on 4 

July	2020.	The	public	consultation	lasted	30	working	days,	finishing	on	29	August	2020,	when	Geoalcali	

proceeded	to	respond	to	the	queries	that	were	raised	during	that	period.  

Following the public consultation for the Mining Concession documentation, the authorities split the Mining 

Concession	review	into	five	sections	covering	all	aspects	of	the	Project.	The	Company	provided	prompt	and	

comprehensive	replies	to	all	questions	from	the	authorities	on	the	first	four	sections	of	the	documentation	

during	the	fourth	quarter	of	the	year.	In	December	2020,	the	Company	was	advised	that	despite	efforts	

to	expedite	the	process,	the	final	section,	covering	the	restoration	and	emergency	plans,	the	backfilling	

process	and	water	plants,	would	not	be	received	until	early	in	2021.	On	1	March	2021,	the	Company	reported	

that	it	had	received,	and	provided	answers	to,	all	questions	contained	in	the	fifth	and	final	section.

Regarding  other  licences  required  for  construction,  in  September  2020  the  Industry  Department  of  the 

Government	 of	 Navarra	 granted	 the	 administrative	 authorisation	 for	 construction	 of	 the	 high	 voltage	

electrical supply from Sangüesa to the planned principal substation on site, including the substation, and 

the	Industry	Department	of	Spain’s	central	government	granted	the	complementary	authorisation	for	the	

continuation	of	the	high	voltage	connection	from	the	principal	substation	up	to	and	including	the	planned	

portal	substation. 	Subject	to	the	normal	local	construction	licences,	and	subject	to	the	issue	of	the	Mining	

Concession,	these	authorisations	are	the	essential	approvals	necessary	to	proceed	with	the	construction	

of	the	overhead	lines	and	substations	that	will	provide	grid	power	to	the	Muga	Mine. 

During	the	year	the	Company	interacted	extensively	with	the	relevant	local	authorities	in	preparation	for	

the	award	of	other	construction	licences,	notably	those	relating	to	water,	power,	and	land. 	Power	lines	have	

been	already	authorised,	conditional	on	the	Mining	Concession	having	been	awarded,	and	other	permits	

such	as	those	related	to	water	authorities	are	also	conditional	on	the	Mining	Concession. 	The	Company	

estimates that approximately four months will be required to secure the required licences, starting from 

the award of the Mining Concession, which will also allow the start of the expropriation process for land that 

has	not	yet	been	secured.   

52

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSMuga Project Technical Update

During	the	first	half	of	the	year,	engineering	submissions	were	made	by	the	principal	equipment	suppliers	

and	engineering	consultants,	allowing	basic	design	of	the	process	plant	to	be	advanced	and	detailed	design	

to	commence.	As	part	of	this	work,	K-Utec	AG	Salt	Technologies	completed	the	test	work	used	to	detail	the	

systems	and	components	necessary	for	the	dewatering	and	backfilling	system	and	continued	to	progress	

the	proposals	for	the	backfilling	storage	and	placement	systems.		In	parallel	with	the	development	of	the	

Project’s	 engineering	 design,	 value	 engineering	 reviews	 continued	 throughout	 to	 optimise	 costs,	 and	

additional	laboratory	work	was	carried	out	to	optimise	the	quality	specification	of	salt	to	be	produced	from	

the	Muga	Mine.

The	Company’s	negotiations	with	Komatsu	led	to	signing	of	a	purchase	contract	for	a	Joy	miner	bolter	on	

29	September	2020,	which	was	followed	by	a	deposit	payment.	The	miner	bolter	will	allow	the	excavation	

and	construction	of	the	decline	portals	following	the	completion	of	site	preparation	activities.	The	miner	

bolter	will	be	complemented	by	the	lease	of	two	roadheaders,	which	will	provide	operational	flexibility	and	

reduce	decline	construction	risk.	

Following	the	lifting	of	the	national	State	of	Alarm	in	Spain,	geotechnical	drilling	and	other	site	investigation	

work	commenced	in	June	2020.	These	works	consisted	of	a	series	of	shallow	drill	holes	(up	to	approximately	

15	metres	deep)	and	inspection	pits	across	the	plant	site	area	to	provide	confirmation	of	specific	ground	

conditions	for	the	final	detailed	design	of	foundations	and	bulk	earthmoving	and	were	extended	during	the	

third	quarter	of	the	year	to	the	location	of	the	proposed	off-site	electrical	substation.	The	programme	was	

ongoing	at	the	end	of	the	year. 

During	the	third	quarter	of	the	year	K-Utec	Salt	Technologies	AG	completed	the	basic	engineering	for	the	

tailings	dewatering	and	backfilling	system,	and	detailed	engineering	work	by	IDOM	Consulting	commenced.	

Following	advances	in	the	detailed	design	of	the	access	ramps,	experienced	Spanish	mining	consultants,	

Igan	 Ingeniería	 s.l.,	 provided	 consultancy	 during	 the	 fourth	 quarter	 on	 the	 detailed	 mine	 design	 and	

infrastructure	design.

On	27	January	2021	the	Company	announced	in	its	Fourth	Quarterly	Activities	Report	for	2020	that	it	was	

now	ready	to	issue	all	relevant	engineering	documentation	to	its	construction	partner.

The	key	areas	covered	by	the	engineering	documentation	are	the	design	of:	

a)  the mine, including the declines to the mineralisation;

b)  the	processing	plant,	and	urbanization;	and

c)  the	tailings,	dewatering	and	backfilling	systems.

53

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSSales and Marketing Update

On	6	February	2020	the	Company	announced	the	signing	of	a	MOU	for	offtake	from	the	Muga	Mine	with	

Keytrade	AG	for	the	sale	of	up	to	300,000	metric	tonnes	per	annum	of	muriate	of	potash.	Keytrade	is	a	

large	Swiss	based	agri-trader	with	significant	experience	working	with	all	types	of	suppliers,	distributors,	

retailers,	and	end-users	across	all	fertiliser	products	and	is	active	in	more	than	115	countries.

The	Company	continued	to	execute	its	sales	and	marketing	strategy	by	signing	a	non-binding	offtake	MOU	

with	Maxisalt,	as	reported	on	29	April	2020.	Under	this	MOU,	Geoalcali	will	provide	up	to	500,000	tonnes	

per	annum	of	salt	to	Maxisalt,	comprising	400,000	tonnes	of	vacuum	salt,	and	100,000	tonnes	of	de-icing	

salt,	 both	 of	 which	 will	 be	 by-products	 from	 the	 processing	 of	 potash.	 Maxisalt	 is	 an	 international	 salt	

distribution	company	located	in	Barcelona	and	a	global	distributor	of	rock	salt,	solar	salt,	and	vacuum	salt	

with	a	diversified	network	of	international	clients	and	a	particular	focus	on	markets	located	in	Spain	and	

France.

As	well	as	contributing	by-product	revenue,	salt	sales	will	help	maintain	the	low	environmental	footprint	

of	 the	 Muga	 Mine	 and	 will	 assist	 in	 ensuring	 full	 compliance	 with	 environmental	 conditions,	 including	

the	removal	of	all	salt	from	surface	as	part	of	rehabilitation	of	the	mine	site	following	the	end	of	potash	

production.	

Highfield	has	already	signed	non-binding	MOUs	representing	more	than	its	full	Phase	1	capacity	for	potash	

and	 salt.	 The	 Company	 is	 confident	 that	 the	 Project	 is	 ready	 to	 proceed	 from	 a	 sales	 and	 marketing	

readiness	 perspective,	 nonetheless	 it	 continues	 to	 engage	 in	 ongoing	 offtake	 discussions	 with	 other	

wholesale	 customers,	 distributors	 and	 traders	 with	 a	 view	 to	 optimising	 sales	 for	 the	 entire	 production	

capacity	of	muriate	of	potash	and	salt	from	the	Muga	Mine.

Project Financing

In	November	2020,	the	Company	appointed	Endeavour	Financial,	a	leading	independent	advisor,	as	financial	

advisor	for	the	debt	financing	of	Muga.		Work	is	ongoing	in	preparation	for	the	debt	financing.	

The	Company	also	continues	to	engage	with	key	brokers,	potential	strategic	investors	and	other	institutional	

investors	as	it	prepares	to	secure	the	equity	portion	of	the	financing	at	some	stage	after	the	receipt	of	the	

Mining	Concession.

Highfield	remains	confident	of	securing	the	necessary	debt	and	equity	financing	in	due	course,	to	support	

a	final	investment	decision	and	the	commencement	of	construction.

54

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSPintanos Project 

Geoalcali’s	100%	owned	Pintanos	tenement	area,	comprising	the	three	permits	of	Molineras	1,	Molineras	2	

and	Puntarrón	abuts	the	Muga	Project	and	covers	an	area	of	65km2.	Depths	from	surface	to	mineralisation	

commence	 at	 around	 500	 metres.	 Geoalcali	 is	 building	 on	 substantial	 historical	 potash	 exploration	

information	which	includes	seven	drill	holes	and	ten	seismic	profiles	completed	in	the	late	1980s.

Geoalcali	was	granted	a	three	year	extension	to	the	drilling	permit	at	Molineras	1	in	June	2020.	However,	

it	 continues	 to	 await	 the	 award	 of	 permits	 at	 Molineras	 2.	 In	 2019	 Geoalcali	 re-initiated	 the	 application	

process  for  this  permit  following  the  conclusion  of  the  public  consultation  period  and  responded  to  all 

comments	received	during	the	consultation	period.	Geoalcali’s	application	for	the	Puntarrón	permit	also	

remains	outstanding.

Notwithstanding	its	confidence	that	the	Molineras	2	and	Puntarrón	permits	will	be	obtained,	and	the	Group’s	

intention	to	continue	developing	its	Pintanos	project,	the	Company	determined	at	the	half	year	that,	taking	

into	account	the	increasing	focus	on	the	Muga	Project,	it	was	prudent	to	impair	the	Pintanos	project.	Details	

in	relation	to	this	impairment	are	disclosed	in	note	10	to	the	consolidated	financial	statements	below.

55

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSSierra del Perdón Project

Geoalcali’s	100%	owned	Sierra	del	Perdón	tenement	area	(“SdP”)	comprising	the	three	permits	of	Quiñones,	

Adiós	and	Ampliación	de	Adiós	is	located	south	east	of	Pamplona	and	covers	approximately	120km2.	SdP	

is	a	brownfield	project	which	previously	hosted	two	potash	mines	operating	from	the	1960s	until	the	late	

1990s	producing	nearly	500,000	tonnes	of	potash	per	annum.	There	is	potential	for	potash	exploitation	in	

new,	unmined	areas	in	the	SdP	area.

The	Company	was	advised	in	the	fourth	quarter	of	2018	that	the	second	three	year	extension	application	

for	 the	 Adiós	 and	 Quiñones	 permits	 had	 been	 rejected	 by	 the	 mining	 department	 of	 the	 Government	 of	

Navarra.		The	basis	of	the	rejection	of	the	Quiñones	and	Adiós	extension	application	was	that	Geoalcali	had	

not	performed	sufficient	drilling	and	geophysics	exploration	when	compared	with	what	it	had	committed	

to	in	the	three	year	work	plans	submitted	to	the	authorities.		Geoalcali	appealed	this	decision	in	2019	on	the	

basis	of	legal	advice	received	and	the	fact	that	the	reasons	for	not	being	able	to	perform	the	work	outlined	

were	due	to	factors	outside	Geoalcali’s	control.

In	the	fourth	quarter	of	2020,	the	Company	was	advised	that	the	second	three-year	extension	application	

for	the	Ampliación	de	Adiós	permit	had	also	been	rejected	by	the	mining	department	of	the	Government	of	

Navarra	for	the	same	reason.	In	December	2020,	Geoalcali	presented	a	further	appeal	in	respect	of	all	three	

permits	to	halt	the	rejection	process.

Notwithstanding	its	confidence	in	a	positive	resolution	to	the	extension	applications	for	all	three	permits,	

and	the	Group’s	intention	to	continue	developing	the	SdP	project,	the	Company	determined	at	the	half	year	

that,	taking	into	account	the	increasing	focus	on	the	Muga	Project,	it	was	prudent	to	impair	the	SdP	project.	

Details	 in	 relation	 to	 this	 impairment	 are	 disclosed	 in	 note	 10	 to	 the	 consolidated	 financial	 statements	

below.	

No	drilling	took	place	at	SdP	during	the	year.

56

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS57

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSGeoalcali Foundation

Projects

The Geoalcali Foundation 
is a not-for-profit Spanish 
foundation, funded 
exclusively by Geoalcali. 
It was established to 
support projects in the 
communities in which the 
Company will operate its 
mines.

Geoalcali’s	community	engagement	programme	continues	to	be	well	received	despite	the	reductions	made	

to	 adjust	 its	 CSR	 activities	 budget.	 The	 Geoalcali	 Foundation	 supports	 and	 finances	 projects	 related	 to	

its	 four	 pillars:	 Quality	 Education,	 Social	 Integration,	 Sustainable	 Communities,	 and	 Best	 Environmental	

Outcomes.	During	this	2020,	the	main	focus	has	been	boosting	corporate	volunteering	by	Company	staff	

and	 assisting	 communities	 during	 the	 Covid-19	 outbreak	 with	 donations	 from	 the	 Company	 and	 staff	

members. 

The	 Geoalcali	 Foundation	 currently	 provides	 ongoing	 support	 to	 over	 10	 community	 projects	 and	 since	

its	 establishment	 in	 September	 2014	 has	 been	 involved	 in	 a	 range	 of	 projects	 with	 town	 halls,	 social	

associations,	 foundations	 and	 scientific/agricultural	 organisations.	 The	 activities	 of	 the	 Foundation	 are	

well	known	and	appreciated	by	the	local	community,	with	a	number	of	them	having	received	awards	and	

recognition	as	sustainable	initiatives. 

Corporate

Directors

On	20	April	2020	the	Company	announced	the	appointment	of	its	new	CEO,	Mr.	Ignacio	Salazar,	following	
the	resignation	of	Managing	Director,	Mr.	Peter	Albert,	on	31	January	2020. 	The	Company’s	Chairman,	Mr.	
Richard	Crookes	assumed	the	role	of	Acting	Chief	Executive	Officer	until	Mr.	Salazar	took	up	the	role	of	CEO 	
on	20	July	2020. 

Ignacio	Salazar	is	an	international	executive	with	more	than	30	years	of	experience	in	the	natural	resources	
industry.	He	has	lived	and	worked	in	various	countries	in	Europe	and	South	America.	Mr.	Salazar	assumed	
the	position	of	CEO	of	Highfield	in	July	2020,	after	coming	from	Orosur	Mining,	a	Canadian	gold	mining	
company	with	operations	in	Colombia,	Uruguay	and	Chile,	which	is	listed	in	the	London	and	Toronto	stock	
markets,	 and	 in	 which	 he	 worked	 as	 CEO	 and	 CFO	 for	 12	 years.	 He	 had	 previously	 pursued	 an	 18-year	
international career in oil and gas exploration and production with Royal Dutch Shell, where he led new 
business	development	and	finance	teams	in	countries	such	as	the	UK,	Germany,	Denmark	and	Argentina,	as	
well	as	working	in	headquarters	in	London	and	The	Hague.	Following	his	tenure	at	Shell,	in	2008	he	joined	
Orosur	Mining,	where	he	was	appointed	CEO	in	2013,	until	joining	Highfield.

Educated	at	the	University	of	Deusto	(Bilbao)	where	he	completed	his	master’s	degrees	in	Economics	and	
Business	and	Law,	Mr.	Salazar	initially	worked	in	companies	such	as	Hidrola	(now	Iberdrola)	in	Madrid,	and	
Management	Horizons	in	London.

Mr.	 Salazar	 has	 extensive	 experience	 in	 the	 exploration,	 development,	 construction	 and	 operation	 of	
open	pit	and	underground	mines,	as	well	as	in	the	development	of	local	relations	with	communities	and	
governments,	and	international	relations	within	the	industry	and	in	the	capital	markets	of	London,	Europe	
and	North	America,	both	raising	capital	and	in	mergers	and	acquisitions.

The	Board	recently	said	farewell	to	former	Non-Executive	Director,	Mr.	Jim	Dietz,	who	retired	and	stepped	
down	 from	 the	 Board	 on	 18	 February	 2021	 after	 five	 years	 of	 service.	 He	 was	 also	 a	 member	 of	 the	
Remuneration	and	Nomination	Committee.  

58

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSAnnual Review of Ore Reserves and Mineral 
Resources

In	accordance	with	ASX	Listing	Rule	5,	the	Company	has	performed	an	annual	review	of	all	JORC-compliant	Ore	Reserves	and	Mineral	Resources	as	at	

31	December	2020.		Rounding	differences	may	occur.

Muga Project

A	maiden	Ore	Reserve	for	the	Muga	Project	was	calculated	as	part	of	the	Definitive	Feasibility	Study	as	released	to	the	ASX	on	30	March	2015.

An	updated	Ore	Reserve	for	the	Muga	Project	was	calculated	as	at	December	2018	and	released	to	the	ASX	on	22	January	2019.	The	Company	considers	

this	Ore	Reserve	to	be	accurate	as	at	31	December	2020.

Table 1: Muga Ore Reserves Summary

Proved 

Probable 

Total Proved & Probable 

31 December 2020

31 December 2019

31 December 2018

Tonnes In Place 
(Mt)

42.9 

65.8 

108.7 

Grade
K2O (%)

10.2% 

10.2% 

10.2% 

Tonnes In Place 
(Mt)

42.9 

65.8 

108.7 

Grade 
K2O (%)

10.2% 

10.2% 

10.2% 

Tonnes In Place 
(Mt)

42.9 

65.8 

108.7 

Grade 
K2O (%)

10.2%

10.2%

10.2%

Highfield	released	an	updated	JORC-compliant	Mineral	Resource	Estimate	(“MRE”)	to	the	ASX	on	10	October	2018.	The	Company	has	prepared	an	updated	
MRE	as	at	31	December	2020	which	has	been	audited	by	SRK	Consulting	UK	Ltd.	Refer	to	the	ASX	Additional	Information	section	of	this	report	for	full	
details,	starting	on	page	125.	The	changes	in	the	updated	MRE	are	not	expected	to	have	any	material	impact	on	the	Muga	Ore	Reserves	or	the	current	
mine	plan.	The	MRE	includes	all	Ore	Reserves	shown	above	in	Table	1. 

Table 2: Muga Mineral Resources Summary

Measured 

Indicated 

Total Measured & Indicated 

Inferred 

Total 

31 December 2020

31 December 2019

31 December 2018

Tonnes In Place 
(Mt)

Grade
K2O (%)

Tonnes In Place 
(Mt)

Grade 
K2O (%)

Tonnes In Place 
(Mt)

103.2 

134.1 

237.3 

44.9 

282.2 

12.3% 

11.7% 

12.0% 

10.8% 

11.8% 

91.8 

143.0 

234.8 

32.6 

267.4 

12.4% 

12.1% 

12.3% 

12.9% 

12.4% 

91.8 

143.0 

234.8 

32.6 

267.4 

Grade 
K2O (%)

12.4%

12.1%

12.3%

12.9%

12.4%

59

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSSierra del Perdón Project

Highfield	released	a	maiden	MRE	for	the	Sierra	del	Perdón	Project	to	the	ASX	on	7	April	2015.	The	Company	considers	this	MRE	to	be	accurate	as	at	31	
December	2020.

Table 3: Sierra del Perdón Mineral Resources Summary

Measured 

Indicated 

Total Measured & Indicated 

Inferred 

Total 

31 December 2020

31 December 2019

31 December 2018

Tonnes In Place 
(Mt)

- 

41.8 

41.8 

40.3 

82.1 

Grade
K2O (%)

- 

10.7% 

10.7% 

10.5% 

10.6% 

Tonnes In Plac 
 (Mt)

- 

41.8 

41.8 

40.3 

82.1 

Grade 
K2O (%)

- 

10.7% 

10.7% 

10.5% 

10.6% 

Tonnes In Plac 
 (Mt)

- 

41.8 

41.8 

40.3 

82.1 

Grade 
K2O (%)

-

10.7%

10.7%

10.5%

10.6%

Pintanos Project

Highfield	released	a	maiden	MRE	for	the	Pintanos	Project	to	the	ASX	on	20	November	2013.		During	the	year	ended	30	June	2017,	two	drill	holes	were	
completed	 at	 the	 Pintanos	 Project	 (see	 the	 Company’s	 ASX	 Quarterly	 Activities	 Report	 released	 on	 24	 April	 2017).	 	 The	 results	 of	 both	 holes	 were	
unfavourable	compared	with	the	block	model	which	informed	the	maiden	Mineral	Resource	Estimate	released	on	20	November	2013	and	therefore	
adversely	impacted	the	tonnage	available	to	be	classified	as	Inferred	Mineral	Resources.	As	a	result,	a	revised	MRE	was	prepared	and	reported	in	the	
ASX	Additional	Information	section	of	the	Company’s	annual	report	for	the	year	ended	30	June	2017,	as	summarised	in	Table	4	below.	The	Company	
continues	to	believe	the	exploration	potential	for	Pintanos	remains	strong	and	will	continue	exploration	of	the	project.

The	Company	considers	this	MRE	to	be	accurate	as	at	31	December	2020.

Table 4: Pintanos Mineral Resources Summary

Measured 

Indicated 

Total Measured & Indicated 

Inferred 

Total 

31 December 2020

31 December 2019

31 December 2018

Tonnes In Place 
(Mt)

Grade
K2O (%)

Tonnes In Place 
(Mt)

Grade 
K2O (%)

Tonnes In Plac 
 (Mt)

Grade 
K2O (%)

- 

- 

- 

70.7 

70.7 

- 

- 

- 

11.9% 

11.9% 

- 

- 

- 

70.7 

70.7 

- 

- 

- 

11.9% 

11.9% 

- 

- 

- 

70.7 

70.7 

-

-

-

11.9%

11.9%

60

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSSummary

A	summary	of	Highfield’s	total	Ore	Reserves	and	Mineral	Resources	is	shown	below.

Table 5: Highfield Total Ore Reserves Summary (all projects)

Proved 

Probable 

Total Proved & Probable 

31 December 2020

31 December 2019

31 December 2018

Tonnes In Place  
(Mt)

42.9 

65.8 

108.7 

Grade
K2O (%)

10.2% 

10.2% 

10.2% 

Tonnes In Place 
(Mt)

42.9 

65.8 

108.7 

Grade 
K2O (%)

10.2% 

10.2% 

10.2% 

Tonnes In Place 
(Mt)

42.9 

65.8 

108.7 

Grade 
K2O (%)

10.2%

10.2%

10.2%

Table 6: Highfield Total Mineral Resources Summary (all projects)

The	MRE	includes	all	Ore	Reserves	shown	above	in	Table	5.

Measured 

Indicated 

Total Measured & Indicated 

Inferred 

Total 

31 December 2020

31 December 2019

31 December 2018

Tonnes In Plac 
 (Mt)

103.2 

175.9 

279.1 

155.9 

435.0 

Grade
K2O (%)

12.3% 

11.5% 

11.8% 

11.2% 

11.6% 

Tonnes In Plac 
 (Mt)

91.8 

184.8 

276.6 

143.6 

420.2 

Grade 
K2O (%)

12.4% 

11.9% 

12.0% 

11.7% 

11.9% 

Tonnes In Place 
(Mt)

91.8 

184.8 

276.6 

143.6 

420.2 

Grade 
K2O (%)

12.4%

11.9%

12.0%

11.7%

11.9%

61

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSCorporate Governance – 
Mineral Resource and Ore 
Reserve Calculations

Due	 to	 the	 nature,	 stage	 and	 size	 of	 the	 Company’s	 existing	 operations,	 the	 Company	 has	 historically	

concluded	 that	 there	 would	 be	 insufficient	 efficiencies	 or	 additional	 governance	 benefits	 gained	 by	

establishing	 a	 separate	 Mineral	 Resources	 and	 Ore	 Reserves	 committee	 responsible	 for	 reviewing	 and	

monitoring	the	Company’s	processes	for	calculating	Mineral	Resources	and	Ore	Reserves	and	for	ensuring	

that	 the	 appropriate	 internal	 controls	 are	 applied	 to	 such	 calculations.	 However,	 the	 establishment	 of	

such	a	committee,	at	an	appropriate	time,	remains	under	consideration.	In	the	meantime,	the	Company	

continues	to	ensure	that	all	drill	results	and	Mineral	Resource	calculations	are	validated	by	a	competent,	

senior	geologist	and	are	reviewed	and	verified	independently	by	a	qualified	person.	In	addition,	the	existing	

composition	of	the	Highfield	Board	of	Directors	includes	a	qualified	geologist.

Significant Changes in the State 
of Affairs

There	have	been	no	significant	changes	in	the	state	of	affairs	of	the	Group	during	the	financial	year,	other	

than	as	set	out	in	this	report.

Significant Events After the 
Reporting Date

There	have	been	no	significant	events	after	the	reporting	date	requiring	disclosure	in	this	report.		

Likely Developments and 
Expected Results of Operations

The	 Directors	 have	 excluded	 from	 this	 report	 any	 further	 information	 on	 the	 likely	 developments	 in	 the	

operations	of	the	Company	and	the	expected	results	of	those	operations	in	future	financial	periods,	as	the	

Directors	believe	that	it	would	be	speculative	and	prejudicial	to	the	interests	of	the	Company.

62

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSEnvironmental Regulations and 
Performance

The	operations	of	the	Company	are	presently	subject	to	environmental	regulation	under	the	laws	of	the	Commonwealth	of	Australia	and	of	Spain.	The	

Company	has	been	at	all	times	in	full	environmental	compliance	with	the	conditions	of	its	licences.

Share Options

As	at	the	date	of	this	report	there	were	22,820,330	unissued	ordinary	shares	under	options.	Refer	to	note	12(e)	to	the	consolidated	financial	statements	

below	for	details.

Number

3,000,000 

1,000,000 

7,000,000 

3,221,170 

1,818,171 

1,546,855 

333,333 

1,622,191 

1,368,757 

333,333 

1,243,186 

333,334 

22,820,330

Exercise Price $

$1.29 

$0.83 

$0.81 

$0.83 

$0.83 

$0.81 

$0.47 

$0.83 

$0.81 

$0.47 

$0.81 

$0.47 

Expiry Date

30 June 2021

30 June 2022

30 June 2023

31 December 2022

31 December 2023

31 December 2023

31 December 2023

31 December 2024

31 December 2024

31 December 2024

31 December 2025

31 December 2025

No	option	holder	has	any	right	under	the	options	to	participate	in	any	other	share	issue	of	the	Company	or	any	other	entity.	The	following	options	were	issued	during	the	

financial	year:	

 — 7,000,000	options	with	an	exercise	price	of	$0.81,	expiring	on	30	June	2023	

 — 1,546,855	options	with	an	exercise	price	of	$0.81,	expiring	on	31	December	2023	

 — 333,333	options	with	an	exercise	price	of	$0.47,	expiring	on	31	December	2023	

 — 1,368,757	options	with	an	exercise	price	of	$0.81,	expiring	on	31	December	2024	

 — 333,333	options	with	an	exercise	price	of	$0.47,	expiring	on	31	December	2024	

 — 1,243,186	options	with	an	exercise	price	of	$0.81,	expiring	on	31	December	2025	

 — 333,334	options	with	an	exercise	price	of	$0.47,	expiring	on	31	December	2025	

The	following	options	lapsed	during	the	financial	year:	

 — 4,832,221	options	with	an	exercise	price	of	$1.34,	expiring	on	30	June	2025	

 — 7,342,397	options	with	an	exercise	price	of	$1.29,	expiring	on	31	December	2025	

No	options	were	cancelled	during	the	financial	year.	

For	full	details	refer	to	note	18.	

63

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSIndemnification and Insurance of Directors 
and Officers

The	Company	has	made	an	agreement	indemnifying	all	the	Directors	and	officers	of	the	Company	against	all	losses	or	liabilities	incurred	by	each	Director	

or	officer	in	their	capacity	as	Directors	or	officers	of	entities	in	the	Group	to	the	extent	permitted	by	the	Corporations	Act	2001.	The	indemnification	

specifically	excludes	willful	acts	of	negligence.

The	Company	entered	into	insurance	policies	in	respect	of	Directors’	and	Officers’	Liability	Insurance	contracts	for	current	Directors	and	officers	of	

the	Company	and	of	the	Company’s	controlled	entities.		The	liabilities	insured	are	damages	and	legal	costs	that	may	be	incurred	in	defending	civil	or	

criminal	proceedings	that	may	be	brought	against	the	officers	in	their	capacity	as	officers	of	entities	in	the	Group.		The	total	amount	of	insurance	

premiums	paid	has	not	been	disclosed	due	to	confidentiality	reasons.

Directors’ Meetings

The	numbers	of	meetings	of	Directors	and	Committees	held	during	the	financial	year	and	the	number	of	meetings	attended	by	each	Director	were	as	

follows:

Director

Peter Albert 

Pauline Carr 

Richard Crookes 

Roger Davey 

Jim Dietz (retired  18 February 2021) 

Brian Jamieson 

Isaac Querub 

Directors’ Meetings

Remuneration and Nomination Committee

Audit, Business Risk and Compliance 
Committee

A 

- 

8 

8 

8 

8 

8 

8 

B 

- 

8 

8 

8 

8 

8 

7 

A 

- 

5 

5 

5 

5 

5 

5 

B 

- 

5 

5 

3* 

5 

2* 

- 

A 

- 

5 

5 

5 

5 

5 

5 

B

-

5

5*

5

3*

5

-

A number of meetings held during the time the Director held office.

B number of meetings attended. Note that Directors may attend Committee Meetings without being a member of that Committee.

*  Attendance at meeting by invitation.

64

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS 
Proceedings on Behalf of the 
Company

No	person	has	applied	for	leave	of	the	Court	to	bring	proceedings	on	behalf	of	the	Company	or	intervene	in	

any	proceedings	to	which	the	Company	is	a	party	for	the	purpose	of	taking	responsibility	on	behalf	of	the	

Company	for	all	or	any	part	of	those	proceedings.		The	Company	was	not	a	party	to	any	such	proceedings	

during	the	financial	year.

Corporate Governance

In	recognising	the	need	for	robust	standards	of	corporate	behaviour	and	accountability,	the	Directors	of	

Highfield	support	and	adhere	to	the	principles	of	sound	corporate	governance.	The	Board	recognises	the	

recommendations	 of	 the	 Australian	 Securities	 Exchange	 Corporate	 Governance	 Council	 and	 considers	

that	Highfield	is	in	compliance	with	them	to	the	extent	possible	at	this	stage	of	its	development	and	its	

circumstances.	 A	 copy	 of	 the	 latest	 Corporate	 Governance	 Statement	 can	 be	 found	 on	 the	 Company’s	

website.

The	Company	has	established	a	set	of	corporate	governance	policies	and	procedures	and	these	can	be	

found,  together  with  the  Company’s  Code  of  Business  Ethics  and  Conduct,  on  the  Company’s  website: 

www.highfieldresources.com.au.

Auditor Independence and 
Non-Audit Services

Section	 307C	 of	 the	 Corporations	 Act	 2001	 requires	 the	 Company’s	 auditors	 to	 provide	 the	 Directors	

of	 Highfield	 with	 an	 Independence	 Declaration	 in	 relation	 to	 the	 audit	 of	 the	 financial	 report.	 A	 copy	 of	

that	declaration	is	included	at	page	112	of	the	annual	report.	No	non-audit	services	were	provided	by	the	

Company’s	auditor.

65

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSAudited Remuneration Report

This report, which forms part of the Directors’ Report, outlines the remuneration arrangements in place for 

the	key	management	personnel	(KMP)	of	Highfield	Resources	Limited	for	the	year	ended	31	December	2020.	

The	information	provided	in	this	remuneration	report	has	been	audited	as	required	by	Section	308(3C)	of	

the	Corporations	Act	2001.

The	remuneration	report	details	the	remuneration	arrangements	for	KMP	who	are	defined	as	those	persons	

having	authority	and	responsibility	for	planning,	directing	and	controlling	the	major	activities	of	the	Group,	

directly	or	indirectly,	including	any	Director	(whether	executive	or	otherwise)	of	the	Group.	

Details of Directors and Other Key Management 
Personnel

Directors

Richard Crookes

Independent Non-Executive Chairman (and Acting CEO from 1 February to 19 July 2020)

Peter Albert

Pauline Carr

Roger Davey

Jim Dietz

Former Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer (resigned 31 January 2020)

Independent Non-Executive Director

Independent Non-Executive Director

Independent Non-Executive Director (retired 18 February 2021)

Brian Jamieson

Non-Executive Director

Isaac Querub

Independent Non-Executive Director

Key Management

Ignacio Salazar

Chief Executive Officer (commenced 20 July 2020)

Mike Norris

Chief Financial Officer

66

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSRemuneration Policy

The	Board	is	responsible	for	determining	and	reviewing	compensation	arrangements	for	the	Directors	and	

senior	executives	reporting	to	the	CEO.	The	broad	policy	is	to	ensure	that	remuneration	properly	reflects	

the	 individuals’	 duties	 and	 responsibilities	 and	 that	 remuneration	 is	 fair	 and	 competitive	 in	 attracting,	

retaining	and	motivating	quality	people	with	appropriate	skills	and	experience.	At	the	time	of	determining	

remuneration,	consideration	is	given	by	the	Board	to	the	Group’s	financial	circumstances	and	performance.

As	 part	 of	 its	 suite	 of	 corporate	 governance	 policies	 and	 procedures,	 the	 Board	 has	 adopted	 a	 formal	

Remuneration	and	Nomination	Committee	Charter	and	Remuneration	Policy.

The	Committee	and	Board	have	established	the	following	parameters	as	part	of	the	remuneration	framework	

for	executives:	

Level

CEO

Senior executives

Short Term Incentive

Long Term Incentive1

Up to 75% of fixed remuneration  
(up to 75% Corporate KPIs and the remainder 
Personal KPIs) 

Up to 60% of fixed remuneration  
(up to 60% Corporate KPIs and the remainder 
Personal KPIs) 

Up to 85% of fixed remuneration in the form of 
options subject to vesting conditions 

Up to 75% of fixed remuneration in the form of 
options subject to vesting conditions

1 The exercise price of options is set at a premium to the share price at the date of grant, in order to provide an incentive
linked to the longer term performance of the Company relative to the market.  The average premium for options granted 

under the Long Term Incentive Plan during the year was 25%. In general, the participant must remain employed with the 

Company at the vesting assessment date of the options.

Remuneration Philosophy

The	Company	and	its	controlled	entities	aim	to	position	themselves	so	that	the	total	remuneration	paid	

to	 employees	 will	 be	 competitive	 relative	 to	 the	 relevant	 market.	 The	 Remuneration	 and	 Nomination	

Committee	generally	undertakes	a	market	benchmarking	review	of	executive	positions	at	least	once	every	

three	years	to	ensure	that	the	Company’s	remuneration	offerings	remain	competitive	with	its	contemporary	

peer	group.

67

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSUse of Remuneration Consultants 

The	Board	and	the	Remuneration	and	Nomination	Committee	seek	and	consider	advice	from	independent	

remuneration	consultants	to	ensure	that	they	have	relevant	information	for	the	determination	of	all	facets	

of	remuneration	relating	to	the	KMP	and	senior	executives.	The	engagement	of	remuneration	consultants	is	

governed	by	the	Remuneration	and	Nomination	Committee	Charter	which	sets	the	protocols	and	restrictions	

around	the	interaction	between	management	and	the	consultants	with	a	view	to	minimising	the	risk	of	any	

undue	influence	occurring	and	ensuring	compliance	with	the	Corporations	Act	2001	requirements.

The	 advice	 and	 recommendations	 of	 consultants	 are	 used	 by	 the	 Board	 and	 Committee	 as	 a	 guide	 in	

formulating	remuneration	and	policy.	Decisions	are	made	by	the	Board	after	its	own	consideration	of	the	

issues	but	having	regard	to	the	advice	of	the	Committee	and	consultants.

During	the	year	the	Company	did	not	engage	any	remuneration	consultants.	It	engaged	Heidrick	&	Struggles	

to	provide	executive	search	and	assessment	services	in	respect	of	the	Chief	Executive	Officer	role.	

Review of KMP Remuneration 

To	ensure	that	the	KMP	remuneration	remains	consistent	with	the	Company’s	remuneration	policy,	KMP	and	

senior	executive	remuneration	is	reviewed	annually	by	the	Board	with	the	assistance	of	the	Remuneration	

and	 Nomination	 Committee	 and,	 as	 required,	 external	 remuneration	 consultants.	 When	 performing	 the	

remuneration	review,	the	Board	considers:	

 — the Company’s remuneration policy and practices; 

 — relevant	market	benchmarks;	

 — the	skills	and	experience	required	of	each	role	in	order	to	grade	positions	accurately	and	attract	high	

calibre people; and 

 — strategy,	business	plans	and	budgets.

68

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSComponents of Remuneration of Other KMP and Senior Executives

Total Fixed Remuneration (“TFR”)

At-risk remuneration

Short Term Incentive (“STI”)

Long Term Incentive (“LTI”)

Base	remuneration	that	reflects	

the	job	size,	role,	responsibilities	

and professional competence 

of	each	executive,	according	to	

their	knowledge,	experience	and	

accountabilities and considering 

external	market	relativities.

Variable,	performance	based,	annual	cash	incentive	plan	designed	

to	reward	high	performance	against	challenging,	clearly	defined	

and	measurable	objectives	that	are	based	on	a	mix	of	corporate	

and	personal	KPI	targets	that	are	set	to	incentivise	superior	

performance.

The	Board	has	the	flexibility	to	pay	the	STI	in	shares	if	it	deems	

this	is	a	more	appropriate	mechanism	as	befits	the	Company’s	

circumstances	at	different	junctures	in	time.

The equity component of the at-

risk	reward	opportunity,	linked	to	

the	creation	of	shareholder	value	

and	employee	retention.

The	mix	of	fixed	and	at-risk	remuneration	varies	depending	on	the	role	and	level	of	executive,	and	also	depends	on	the	performance	of	the	corporate	

and	individual.	Compared	with	other	employees,	senior	positions	have	a	greater	proportion	of	at-risk	remuneration	and	have	a	higher	proportion	of	

their	at-risk	remuneration	assessed	on	corporate	performance	KPIs.

In	 addition	 to	 fixed	 and	 at-risk	 remuneration,	 share	 options	 may	 be	 issued	 to	 KMPs	 at	 the	 commencement	 of	 their	 employment,	 when	 the	 Board	

determines	this	to	be	appropriate.

Non-Executive Director (“NED”) Remuneration

NED	remuneration	is	reviewed	periodically	by	the	Remuneration	and	Nomination	Committee.	NEDs	receive	a	fixed	fee	remuneration	consisting	of	an	

annual	base	Board	fee	with	additional	fees	for	any	committee	positions	they	hold.	From	time	to	time	and	in	accordance	with	the	Constitution	the	Board	

may	also	award	non-recurring	extra	exertion	amounts	where	it	determines	such	payments	are	warranted.		During	the	year	the	Board	determined	that	

Mr.	Crookes	should	receive	an	extra	exertion	amount	of	$30,000	per	month	for	his	services	as	Acting	Chief	Executive	Officer	until	Mr.	Salazar	assumed	

his	position	as	CEO	in	July	2020.	

In	addition	to	fixed	fee	remuneration,	the	Board	may	propose	that	shareholder	approval	be	sought	for	the	issue	of	share	options	to	Directors	when	it	

determines	this	to	be	appropriate.

The	aggregate	remuneration	for	NEDs	has	been	set	at	an	amount	not	to	exceed	$1,000,000	per	annum	after	the	Shareholders’	approval	at	the	general	

meeting	held	on	24	May	2018.	This	amount	may	only	be	increased	with	the	approval	of	Shareholders	at	a	general	meeting.

69

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSDetails of NED Remuneration

Fees

Board 

Remuneration and Nomination Committee 

Audit, Business Risk and Compliance Committee 

Chairman per annum
$

Member per annum
$

120,000 

18,000 

18,000 

60,000

9,000

9,000

Following	the	approval	of	the	Directors’	Share	Plan	at	the	Company’s	AGM	in	May	2020,	the	Directors	elected	to	subscribe	for	shares	in	lieu	of	25%	of	

their	Directors’	fees	for	the	period	July	to	September	2020,	assisting	the	Company	to	preserve	cash.	Furthermore,	with	effect	from	1	October	2020	the	

Directors	elected	to	forgo	25%	of	their	Directors’	fees,	without	subscribing	for	shares,	until	such	time	as	the	Mining	Concession	for	the	Muga	Project	

is	awarded.	The	Directors	subsequently	elected,	with	effect	from	1	March	2021,	to	forgo	50%	of	their	Directors’	fees	until	the	Mining	Concession	is	

awarded. 

All	NEDs	(including	the	Chairman)	are	entitled	to	be	reimbursed	for	travelling	and	other	expenses	properly	incurred	by	them	in	attending	any	meeting	or	

otherwise	in	connection	with	the	business	or	affairs	of	the	Company.

Key Performance Indicators for Short Term Incentives

Key	Performance	Indicators	(“KPIs”)	are	aligned	to	reflect	corporate	and	strategic	objectives.		KPIs	are	reviewed	by	the	Company’s	Remuneration	and	

Nomination	Committee	and	approved	by	the	Board.	The	KPIs	of	the	CEO	and	the	senior	executives	reporting	directly	to	him	are	also	reviewed	by	the	

Committee	and	approved	by	the	Board.	They	typically	cover	targets	in	respect	of	safety,	permitting,	finance,	project	delivery,	investor	relations	and	

social	responsibility.	In	addition,	the	senior	executives	have	personal	KPIs	appropriate	to	their	areas	of	responsibility.		

The	KPIs	for	the	year	ended	31	December	2020	were	assessed	in	accordance	with	the	parameters	set	out	in	the	Remuneration	Policy	section	above.	

The	STI	for	the	CEO	is	based	on	75%	for	corporate	and	strategic	KPIs.		The	STIs	for	other	senior	executives	are	based	on	a	weighting	of	up	to	60%	for	

corporate	and	strategic	KPIs	and	the	remaining	percentage	for	personal	KPIs.

The	level	of	achievement	of	KPIs	is	assessed	as	Threshold,	Target	or	Stretch,	whereby	the	KPI	weighting	is	multiplied	by	85%,	100%	or	115%	respectively.		

As	a	result,	the	KPI	outcome	may	exceed	the	KPI	weighting.

Summary Corporate and Strategic KPI Performance

For	the	year	ended	31	December	2020	the	STI	corporate	and	strategic	KPI	performance	outcomes	for	KMPs	were	assessed	as	follows:

KPI Category

Objective for the year

Weighting for 2020
%

2020 Outcome
%

Safety, Health, Environmental and Community 

No injuries or environmental incidents and appropriate responses to social grievances 

Mining Concession awarded 

Partial funding of construction 

Construction commenced 

Increase of 30% in average traded daily volume of shares  

Permits 

Financials 

Project progress 

Investor relations 

Total 

70

10 

26 

26 

26 

12 

100 

10

-

-

-

-

10

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS 
Short Term Incentive Award

The	Directors	have	determined	that	no	bonuses	for	KMPs	or	other	employees	for	the	year	ended	31	December	2020	will	be	awarded	or	paid	until	later	in	

2021,	at	a	date	when	the	Mining	Concession	has	been	satisfactorily	obtained.	Notwithstanding	this,	a	provision	is	included	as	an	expense	in	the	financial	

statements	for	the	year	ended	31	December	2020	for	the	cost	of	any	bonuses	that	may	later	be	awarded,	whether	in	cash	or	shares. 

Long Term Incentive Award 

Awards	granted	under	the	Highfield	Resources	Limited	LTI	Plan	consist	of	share	options	which	are	granted	for	no	consideration	and	carry	no	dividend	

or	voting	rights.	Following	vesting	and	subsequent	exercise	of	the	options	one	ordinary	share	in	the	Company	will	be	allocated	per	option.	

The	exercise	price	of	options	is	set	at	a	premium	to	the	share	price	at	the	date	of	grant,	in	order	to	provide	an	incentive	linked	to	the	longer	term	

performance	of	the	Company	relative	to	the	market.	The	premium	used	in	setting	the	exercise	price	for	options	granted	during	the	year	under	the	LTI	

Plan	was	25%.	

In	general,	the	KMP	must	also	remain	employed	with	the	Company	at	the	vesting	assessment	date	of	the	options.	Refer	to	note	18	to	the	consolidated	

financial	statements	for	details	of	the	LTI	Plan.

Feature

Description

Opportunity/allocation

is	determined	by	dividing	the	total	value	by	the	fair	value	per	option	determined	by	using	the	binomial	

The	total	value	of	options	granted	is	based	on	a	percentage	of	fixed	remuneration.	This	percentage	is	

approximately	50%	for	senior	executives	and	20%	for	other	employees.	The	number	of	options	granted	

method	(which	is	derived	from	the	Black-Scholes	option	pricing	model	but	is	considered	more	suitable	for	

companies	which	do	not	pay	dividends).

Performance hurdle

Exercise price

The	performance	hurdle	is	represented	by	the	premium	that	must	be	achieved	before	options	are	in	the	

money.

In	order	to	provide	an	incentive	linked	to	the	longer	term	performance	of	the	Company,	the	exercise	price	

of	options	is	set	at	a	premium	to	the	share	price	at	the	start	of	the	year,	as	represented	by	the	volume	

weighted	average	price	(VWAP)	of	the	preceding	month	of	December.		Due	to	changes	in	the	share	price	

between	this	VWAP	and	the	grant	date,	the	effective	premium	may	be	greater	or	less	than	25%.

Forfeiture and termination

Options	lapse	if	vesting	conditions	are	not	met.	Options	are	forfeited	on	cessation	of	employment	prior	to	

the	vesting	date	unless	the	Board	determines	otherwise.

71

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSDetails of Remuneration

Details	of	the	nature	and	amount	of	each	element	of	the	remuneration	of	each	Director	and	other	key	management	personnel	of	the	Group	for	the	year	

ended 31 December 2020 are as below:

Short term

Options and 
shares

Post-
employment

Year ended 31 December 2020

Directors 

Base
Salary
$

Peter Albert (resigned 31 January 2020) 

60,871 

Pauline Carr 

Richard Crookes (also Acting CEO from 1 February 
to 20 July 2020) 

Roger Davey 

Jim Dietz (retired 18 February 2021) 

Brian Jamieson 

Isaac Querub 

Key Management

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Ignacio Salazar (commenced 20 July 2020) 

Mike Norris 

275,488 

449,087 

Fees
$

- 

84,000 

304,355 

60,378 

60,378 

55,137 

52,500 

- 

- 

785,446 

616,748 

STI
Awards1
$  

Other 
Benefits2
$

Share-based
Payments3
$

Super-
annuation
$

Performance 
related
%

Total
$

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

31,371 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

69,600 

71,100 

67,911 

67,911 

67,912 

67,350 

66,343 

226,733 

176,453 

274,167 

107,294 

745,811 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

5,238 

- 

- 

- 

92,242 

153,600 

375,455 

128,289 

128,289 

128,287 

119,850 

568,564 

732,834 

5,238 

2,427,410 

-

41%

17%

50%

50%

50%

53%

40%

15%

29%

1 The Directors have determined that no STI bonuses will be awarded until later in 2021, at a date when the Mining Concession has been satisfactorily obtained.
Notwithstanding this, a provision is included as an expense in the financial statements for the year ended 31 December 2020 for the cost of any bonuses that may later be 

awarded.

2 Benefits relate to paid private accommodation and in-country residency allowance.

3 Share-based payments of the Directors include 1 million share options granted to each Director during the year. Share-based payments also include 25% of each Director’s
fees for July to September 2020 for which the Director elected to subscribe for shares in lieu of cash. Share-based Payments of Key Management include share options 

awarded under the Company’s LTI Plan as well as 1 million commencement options awarded to Mr. Salazar.

72

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Details of remuneration for the year ended 31 December 2019 (as restated) are shown below:  

Short term

Options

Base
Salary
$

Fees
$

STI
Awards1,2
$  

Other 
Benefits3 
$

Share-based
Payments
$

Post-
employment

Super-
annuation
$

Performance 
related
%

Total
$

Year ended 31 December 2019 (restated1)

Directors 

Derek Carter (retired 23 May 2019) 

- 

49,087 

- 

- 

- 

4,663 

53,750 

Peter Albert 

Pauline Carr 

Richard Crookes 

Roger Davey 

Jim Dietz 

Owen Hegarty (resigned 23 May 2019) 

Brian Jamieson 

Isaac Querub 

Key Management

Mike Norris 

716,147 

- 

259,117 

274,904 

282,527 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

96,000 

102,500 

64,500 

69,000 

25,000 

63,014 

60,000 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

232,200 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

430,532 

- 

147,819 

123,959 

596,871 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

5,986 

- 

- 

1,532,695 

96,000 

334,700 

64,500 

69,000 

25,000 

69,000 

60,000 

1,299,181 

1,146,679 

529,101 

406,936 

398,863 

1,111,598 

10,649 

3,603,826 

-

18%

-

69%

-

-

-

-

-

46%

31%

1 The STI awards in respect of Mr. Albert and Mr. Norris have been restated to correct an error in the amounts previously disclosed in the 2019 remuneration report, being the
omission of an element of the STI award made to them. Accordingly, the previously disclosed amount of $57,512 in respect of Mr. Albert has been restated to $259,117 and the 

previously disclosed amount of $91,370 in respect of Mr. Norris has been restated to $147,819. There was no error in the amounts recorded within the consolidated financial 

statements for 2019.

2 The STI awards relate to the achievement of KPIs for the year ended 31 December 2019 for which the bonus cost was approved by the Board in February 2020 for payment in

April 2020.  The cost of the STI award is included in the financial statements for the year ended 31 December 2019. 

3 Benefits relate to paid private accommodation and in-country residency allowance.

73

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Shareholdings of Directors and Other Key Management Personnel

The	number	of	shares	in	the	Company	held	by	Directors	and	other	key	management	personnel	of	the	Group,	including	their	personally	related	parties,	

is	set	out	below.	There	were	65,963	shares	granted	as	compensation	during	the	year	ended	31	December	2020.

Year ended 31 December 2020

Directors 

Peter Albert (resigned 31 January 2020) 

Richard Crookes 

Pauline Carr 

Roger Davey 

Jim Dietz (retired 18 February 2021) 

Brian Jamieson 

Isaac Querub 

Key Management

Ignacio Salazar (commenced 20 July 2020) 

Mike Norris 

Balance at the start
of the period

Granted as compensation 
during the period 

Other changes during the 
period1

Balance at the end
of the period

78,000 

- 

30,000 

- 

50,000 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

17,295 

12,871 

9,251 

9,251 

9,251 

8,044 

- 

- 

(78,000) 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

-

17,295

42,871

9,251

59,251

9,251

8,044

-

-

1 The other change during the period represents an adjustment to exclude shares held by Peter Albert as he was not a Director at the end of the period.

All	equity	transactions	with	Directors	and	other	key	management	personnel	other	than	those	arising	from	the	grant	of	remuneration	options	have	been	

entered	into	under	terms	and	conditions	no	more	favourable	than	those	the	Company	would	have	adopted	if	dealing	at	arm’s	length.

74

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS 
 
 
Option Holdings of Directors and Other Key Management 
Personnel

The	number	of	options	over	ordinary	shares	in	the	Company	held	by	each	Director	and	other	key	management	personnel	of	the	Group,	including	their	

personally related parties, is set out below:

Year ended 31 December 2020

Directors 

Balance at the 
start
of the period

Granted as 
compensation 
during the 
period 

Expired during 
the period

Other changes 
during the 
period1

Balance at the 
end
of the period

Exercisable

Not 
exercisable

Peter Albert (resigned 31 January 2020) 

5,927,005 

- 

(4,812,941) 

(1,114,064) 

- 

- 

Richard Crookes 

Pauline Carr 

Roger Davey 

1,000,000 

1,000,000 

- 

1,000,000 

1,000,000 

1,000,000 

Jim Dietz (retired 18 February 2021) 

- 

1,000,000 

Brian Jamieson 

Isaac Querub 

Key Management

1,000,000 

1,000,000 

1,000,000 

1,000,000 

Ignacio Salazar (commenced 20 July 2020) 

- 

1,000,000 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Mike Norris 

3,503,218 

1,011,827 

(2,142,481) 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

2,000,000 

2,000,000 

1,000,000 

1,000,000 

2,000,000 

2,000,000 

1,000,000 

1,000,000 

2,000,000 

2,000,000 

2,000,000 

2,000,000 

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

1,000,000 

333,333 

666,667

2,372,564 

893,200 

1,479,364

1 Other changes during the period represent an adjustment to exclude options held by Peter Albert as he was not a Director at the end of the period.

No	option	holder	has	any	right	under	the	options	to	participate	in	any	other	share	issue	of	the	Company	or	any	other	entity.

Options	granted	as	part	of	remuneration	have	been	valued	using	the	binomial	method	(which	is	derived	from	the	Black-Scholes	option	pricing	model	

but	is	considered	more	suitable	for	companies	which	do	not	pay	dividends)	taking	into	account	the	exercise	price,	the	term	of	the	option,	the	impact	

of	dilution,	the	share	price	at	grant	date	and	expected	price	volatility	of	the	underlying	share	and	the	risk	free	interest	rate	for	the	term	of	the	option.

Options	granted	under	the	Company’s	employee	share	option	plan	carry	no	dividend	or	voting	rights.	For	details	on	the	valuation	of	options,	including	

models	and	assumptions	used,	please	refer	to	note	18.

Transactions with Directors and Other Key Management Personnel

Transactions	 with	 key	 management	 personnel	 were	 made	 at	 arm’s	 length	 at	 normal	 market	 prices	 and	 normal	 commercial	 terms.	 There	 were	 no	

transactions	with	key	management	personnel	for	the	year	ended	31	December	2020	other	than	those	disclosed	above.

75

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS 
 
 
 
 
 
Options Affecting Remuneration

The terms and conditions of options granted during the year ended 31 December 2020 affecting remuneration in the current or future reporting periods 

are as follows:

Directors 

Richard Crookes 

Pauline Carr 

Roger Davey 

Number 
granted

Expiry date/
last exercise 
date

Fair value 
per option at 
grant date

Exercise 
price per 
option

Value of 
options at 
grant date1

Number 
of options 
vested

Grant date

Vested

Max value 
yet to vest

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

27/05/20 

1,000,000 

30/06/23 

$0.0636 

27/05/20 

1,000,000 

30/06/23 

$0.0636 

27/05/20 

1,000,000 

30/06/23 

$0.0636 

Jim Dietz (retired 18 February 2021) 

27/05/20 

1,000,000 

30/06/23 

$0.0636 

Brian Jamieson 

Isaac Querub 

Key Management

27/05/20 

1,000,000 

30/06/23 

$0.0636 

27/05/20 

1,000,000 

30/06/23 

$0.0636 

$0.81 

$0.81 

$0.81 

$0.81 

$0.81 

$0.81 

$63,600 

1,000,000 

$63,300 

$63,600 

1,000,000 

$63,300 

$63,600 

1,000,000 

$63,300 

$63,600 

1,000,000 

$63,300 

$63,600 

1,000,000 

$63,300 

$63,600 

1,000,000 

$63,300 

Ignacio Salazar (commenced 20 July 2020) 

15/09/20 

333,333 

31/12/23 

$0.2050 

$0.47 

$68,333 

333,333 

$68,333 

15/09/20 

333,333 

31/12/24 

$0.2279 

$0.47 

$75,967 

15/09/20 

333,334 

31/12/25 

$0.2473 

$0.47 

$82,433 

- 

- 

- 

- 

$75,967

$82,433

Mike Norris 

25/06/20 

376,348 

31/12/23 

$0.0859 

25/06/20 

333,016 

31/12/24 

$0.1084 

25/06/20 

302,463 

31/12/25 

$0.1285 

$0.81 

$0.81 

$0.81 

$32,328 

376,348 

$32,328 

-

$36,099 

$38,866 

- 

- 

- 

- 

$36,099

$38,866

8,011,827 

$715,626 

1,709,681 

$480,461 

$233,365

1 The value at grant date has been calculated in accordance with the models and assumptions as disclosed in note 18.

76

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
KMP Employment Arrangements

The	remuneration	arrangements	for	KMP	are	formalised	in	employment	agreements.	These	agreements	provide	for	the	payment	of	commencement	

options,	fixed	remuneration,	performance	related	STI	bonuses,	other	short	term	benefits,	and	participation,	where	eligible,	in	the	Company’s	LTI	Plan.

Non-Executive Directors

On	appointment	to	the	Board,	each	Non-Executive	Director	enters	into	a	service	agreement	with	the	Group	in	the	form	of	a	letter	of	appointment.	The	

letter	summarises	the	Board	policies	and	terms,	including	compensation,	relevant	to	the	Director.		The	period	of	appointment	is	in	accordance	with	the	

Company’s	Constitution	and	the	Corporations	Act	2001,	including	the	provisions	of	the	constitution	which	relate	to	the	rotation	of	Directors.

Chief Executive Officer

Mr.	Salazar	is	employed	under	an	employment	agreement	which	has	no	fixed	term.	The	notice	period	is	three	months.	Depending	on	the	reason	for	a	

termination	of	his	employment,	Mr.	Salazar	may	be	entitled	to	severance	benefits	of	up	to	nine	months’	fixed	cash	remuneration	(based	on	an	average	

of	his	previous	annual	fixed	remuneration),	or	other	minimum	severance	benefits	set	by	Spanish	law,	as	applicable.	Mr.	Salazar’s	employment	may	also	

be	terminated	at	any	time	without	notice	in	circumstances	of	his	misconduct	or	illness.

During	the	year	ended	31	December	2020	Mr.	Salazar’s	total	fixed	remuneration	was	€168,750	($275,488).	

Other Key Management Personnel

Mr.	Norris	is	employed	under	an	employment	agreement	which	has	no	fixed	term.		The	notice	period	is	three	months.	Depending	on	the	reason	for	

a	termination	of	his	employment,	Mr.	Norris	may	be	entitled	to	a	payment	equal	to	three	months	of	his	annual	fixed	salary.	During	the	year	ended	31	

December	2020	Mr.	Norris’s	base	salary	increased	from	€269,000	($430,532)	to	€272,500	($449,087).	No	changes	were	made	to	Mr.	Norris’s	short	term	

or	long	term	variable	performance	based	incentives	during	the	year	ended	31	December	2020.

77

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSLoans to Directors and Other Key Management Personnel

There	were	no	loans	to	Directors	or	other	key	management	personnel	during	the	year	ended	31	December	2020	(year	ended	31	December	2019:	nil)

Voting and Comments Made at the Company’s May 2020 Annual 
General Meeting

Highfield	Resources	Limited	received	more	than	98.36%	of	“yes”	votes	on	its	remuneration	report	for	the	financial	year	ended	31	December	2019.	The	

Company	did	not	receive	any	specific	feedback	at	the	AGM	or	during	the	current	period	on	its	remuneration	practices.

Performance Measured by Loss per Share and Share Price

The table below shows the performance of the Company measured by loss per share:

Loss per share (cents) 

Share price (at period end) 

Share price High for the reporting period 

Share price Low for the reporting period 

Year ended          
31 December 
2020

Year ended          
31 December 
2019

Year ended            
31 December 
2018

Six months 
ended 31 
December 2017

Year ended 30  
June 2017

Year ended 30 
June 2016

(7.40) 

$0.69 

$0.79 

$0.26 

(2.28) 

$0.68 

$1.01 

$0.57 

(1.28) 

$0.64 

$1.13 

$0.48 

(0.14) 

$1.03 

$1.20 

$0.82 

(2.22) 

$0.96 

$1.49 

$0.90 

(3.42)

$1.38

$2.04

$1.03

78

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSEnd of Audited Remuneration Report

This	Directors’	Report	is	signed	on	behalf	of	the	Board	in	accordance	with	a	resolution	of	the	Directors.	

Richard Crookes 

Independent Non-Executive Chairman

Adelaide, Australia

30 March 2021

79

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS80
80

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSFinancial Report

Consolidated	Statement	of	Profit	or	Loss	and	Other	
Comprehensive	Income

Consolidated Statement of Financial Position

Consolidated Statement of Changes in Equity

Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows

Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements

Directors’ Declaration

Auditor’s Independence Declaration

Independent Auditor’s Report

81

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSConsolidated Statement of Profit or Loss 
and Other Comprehensive Income

for the year ended 31 December 2020

Continuing Operations 

Gain on foreign exchange 

Listing and share registry expenses 

Professional and consultants’ fees 

Director and employee costs 

Share-based payments expense 

Travel and accommodation 

Donations 

Depreciation 

Impairment of deferred exploration and evaluation expenditure  

Other expenses 

Interest paid 

Loss on foreign exchange 

Loss before income tax 

Income tax expense 

Net loss for the period 

Other comprehensive income

Items that may be reclassified to profit or loss 

Exchange differences on translation of foreign operations 

Other comprehensive loss for the period net of tax 

Total comprehensive loss for the period 

Loss per share

Basic and diluted loss per share (cents) 

Note

31 December  2020 
$

31 December 2019 
$

568,899 

-

3 

18 

9 

10 

19 

5 

(69,028) 

(501,834) 

(2,668,872) 

(1,875,964) 

(39,321) 

(134,000) 

(37,313) 

(18,721,810) 

(898,622) 

(12,853) 

- 

(98,701)

(385,351)

(3,038,678)

(2,334,854)

(66,404)

(92,464)

(55,203)

(493,503)

(767,753)

(59,452)

(133,722)

(24,390,718) 

(7,526,084)

- 

-

(24,390,718) 

(7,526,084)

(1,641,824) 

(1,641,824) 

(26,032,542) 

(988,618)

(988,618)

(8,514,702)

6 

(7.40) 

(2.28)

The	above	Consolidated	Statement	of	Profit	or	Loss	and	Other	Comprehensive	Income	should	be	read	in	conjunction	with	the	accompanying	notes.

82

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Consolidated Statement of Financial 
Position

as at 31 December 2020

Current Assets

Cash and cash equivalents 

Other receivables 

Total Current Assets 

Non-Current Assets

Other receivables 

Property, plant and equipment 

Deferred exploration and evaluation expenditure 

Total Non-Current Assets 

Total Assets 

Current Liabilities

Trade and other payables 

Total Current Liabilities 

Total Liabilities 

Net Assets 

Equity

Issued capital 

Reserves 

Accumulated losses 

Total Equity 

Note

31 December  2020 
$

31 December 2019 
$

7 

8 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

20,202,057 

292,116 

20,494,173 

490,692 

89,857 

112,296,472 

112,877,021 

133,371,194 

4,514,595 

4,514,595 

4,514,595 

39,980,018

738,552

40,718,570

516,733

116,726

116,966,324

117,599,783

158,318,353

5,339,651

5,339,651

5,339,651

128,856,599 

152,978,702

172,653,405 

29,364,361 

(73,161,167) 

128,856,599 

172,618,930

29,130,221

(48,770,449)

152,978,702

The	above	Consolidated	Statement	of	Financial	Position	should	be	read	in	conjunction	with	the	accompanying	notes.

83

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Consolidated Statement of Changes in 
Equity

for the year ended 31 December 2020

Year ended 31 December 2019

Balance at 1 January 2019 

Total comprehensive loss for the period

Loss for the period 

Other comprehensive loss - foreign currency translation 

Total comprehensive loss for the period 

Transactions with owners in their capacity as owners

Conversion of options 

Cost of issue 

Share-based payment 

Issued capital
$

Accumulated 
losses
$

Share-based 
payments 
reserve
$

Foreign 
exchange 
translation 
reserve
$

Option premium 
reserve
$

Total
$

172,618,930 

(41,244,365) 

21,010,270 

6,772,715 

1,000 

159,158,550

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

(7,526,084) 

- 

(7,526,084) 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

2,334,854 

- 

(988,618) 

(988,618) 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

(7,526,084)

(988,618)

(8,514,702)

-

-

2,334,854

Balance at 31 December 2019 

172,618,930 

(48,770,449) 

23,345,124 

5,784,097 

1,000 

152,978,702

Year ended 31 December 2020

Balance at 1 January 2020 

Total comprehensive loss for the period

Loss for the period 

Other comprehensive loss - foreign currency translation 

Total comprehensive loss for the period 

Transactions with owners in their capacity as owners 

Conversion of options 

Cost of issue 

Share-based payment 

172,618,930 

(48,770,449) 

23,345,124 

5,784,097 

1,000 

152,978,702

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

34,475 

(24,390,718) 

- 

(24,390,718) 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

1,875,964 

- 

(1,641,824) 

(1,641,824) 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

(24,390,718)

(1,641,824)

(26,032,542)

-

-

1,910,439

Balance at 31 December 2020 

172,653,405 

(73,161,167) 

25,221,088 

4,142,273 

1,000 

128,856,599

The	above	Consolidated	Statement	of	Changes	in	Equity	should	be	read	in	conjunction	with	the	accompanying	notes.

84

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSConsolidated Statement of Cash Flows

for the year ended 31 December 2020

Note

31 December  2020 
$

31 December 2019 
$

Cash flows from operating activities

Payments to suppliers and employees 

Interest paid 

Other receipts including GST/VAT received 

Net cash used in operating activities 

Cash flows from investing activities

Purchase of plant and equipment 

Payments for exploration and evaluation expenditure 

Net cash used in investing activities 

Cash flows from financing activities

Proceeds from conversion of options 

Payments for share issue costs 

Net cash provided by financing activities 

Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents 

Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning of the period 

Effect of exchange rate fluctuations on cash 

Cash and cash equivalents at the end of the period 

(5,438,297) 

(12,859) 

2,266,039 

(3,185,117) 

(12,722) 

(17,156,788) 

(17,169,510) 

- 

- 

- 

(20,354,627) 

39,980,018 

576,666 

20,202,057 

(4,124,221)

(59,452)

1,048,745

(3,134,928)

(49,361)

(11,398,108)

(11,447,469)

-

-

-

(14,582,397)

55,157,707

(595,292)

39,980,018

7 

7 

The	above	Consolidated	Statement	of	Cash	Flows	should	be	read	in	conjunction	with	the	accompanying	notes.

85

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Notes to the Consolidated 
Financial Statements

for the year ended 31 December 2020

1. Corporate Information

The	financial	report	of	Highfield	Resources	Limited	(“Highfield	Resources”,	“Highfield”	or	“the	Company”)	

for the year ended 31 December 2020 was authorised for issue in accordance with a resolution of the 

Directors on 30	March	2021.  

Highfield	 is	 a	 company	 limited	 by	 shares	 domiciled	 and	 incorporated	 in	 Australia	 whose	 shares	 are	

publicly	traded	on	the	Australian	Securities	Exchange.	The	nature	of	the	operations	and	the	principal	

activities	of	the	Company	are	described	in	the	Directors’	Report.

86

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies 

a)  Basis of preparation

These	general	purpose	financial	statements	have	been	prepared	in	accordance	with	Australian	

Accounting Standards and Interpretations issued by the Australian Accounting Standards Board 

and	the	Corporations	Act	2001.	Highfield	Resources	Limited	is	a	for-profit	entity	for	the	purpose	

of	 preparing	 the	 financial	 statements.	 The	 financial	 statements	 have	 also	 been	 prepared	 on	 a	

historical	cost	basis.	The	presentation	currency	is	Australian	dollars.

b)  Compliance statement

The	 financial	 report	 also	 complies	 with	 International	 Financial	 Reporting	 Standards	 (IFRS)	 as	

issued	by	the	International	Accounting	Standards	Board	(IASB).

c)  Basis of consolidation

The	consolidated	financial	statements	comprise	the	financial	statements	of	the	Company	and	its	

subsidiaries	(“the	Group”)	at	31	December	2020	and	at	31	December	2019	in	the	comparative	period.

Subsidiaries	 are	 those	 entities	 over	 which	 the	 Company	 has	 the	 power	 to	 govern	 the	 financial	

and	operating	policies	so	as	to	obtain	benefits	from	their	activities.	The	existence	and	effect	of	

potential	voting	rights	that	are	currently	exercisable	or	convertible	are	considered	when	assessing	

whether	a	Company	controls	another	entity.

In	preparing	the	consolidated	financial	statements,	all	intercompany	balances	and	transactions,	

income	and	expenses	and	profit	and	losses	resulting	from	inter-company	transactions	have	been	

eliminated	in	full.	Unrealised	losses	are	also	eliminated	unless	costs	cannot	be	recovered.

d)  Foreign currency translation

i)  Functional currency

The functional currency for each entity in the Group is the currency of the primary economic 

environment	 in	 which	 that	 entity	 operates.	 	 For	 the	 Australian	 entities,	 including	 Highfield	

Resources	Limited,	this	is	Australian	dollars.		For	the	Spanish	subsidiary	this	is	Euros.

ii)  Transactions and balances

Transactions denominated in other currencies are translated into the functional currency at 

the	exchange	rate	prevailing	at	the	date	of	the	transaction	or	valuation	where	items	are	re-

measured.	Monetary	assets	and	liabilities	denominated	in	foreign	currency	are	retranslated	at	

year	end	exchange	rates.

Foreign exchange gains and losses resulting from the settlement of such transactions and from 

the translation at period end exchange rates of monetary assets and liabilities denominated in 

foreign	currencies	are	recognised	in	the	Consolidated	Statement	of	Profit	or	Loss	and	Other	

Comprehensive	Income.

iii) Presentation currency

The	Group’s	financial	statements	are	presented	in	Australian	dollars.	On	consolidation,	income	

statement  items  for  each  entity  are  translated  from  the  functional  currency  into  Australian 

dollars	at	average	rates	of	exchange	where	the	average	is	a	reasonable	approximation	of	rates	

prevailing	on	the	transaction	date.	The	Consolidated	Statement	of	Financial	Position	items	are	

translated	into	Australian	dollars	at	period	end	exchange	rates.

87

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSe)  Segment reporting

Operating	segments	are	reported	in	a	manner	consistent	with	the	internal	reporting	provided	to	the	

chief	operating	decision	maker.	The	chief	operating	decision	maker,	who	is	responsible	for	allocating	

resources	 and	 assessing	 performance	 of	 the	 operating	 segments,	 has	 been	 identified	 as	 the	 Chief	

Executive	Officer.	The	Group	has	identified	a	single	segment	focused	on	development	of	potash	mines	

in	Spain.	All	of	the	Group’s	activities	are	interrelated	and	financial	information	is	reported	to	the	Chief	

Executive	Officer	in	this	manner.

f)  Exploration and evaluation expenditure

Exploration	and	evaluation	expenditures	in	relation	to	each	separate	area	of	interest	are	recognised	

as	 an	 exploration	 and	 evaluation	 asset	 in	 the	 period	 in	 which	 they	 are	 incurred	 where	 the	 following	

conditions	are	satisfied:

i)  the rights to tenure of the area of interest are current; and

ii) at least one of the following conditions is also met:

a) the	 exploration	 and	 evaluation	 expenditures	 are	 expected	 to	 be	 recouped	 through	 successful	

development	and	exploitation	of	the	area	of	interest,	or	alternatively,	by	its	sale;	or

b) exploration	and	evaluation	activities	in	the	area	of	interest	have	not	at	the	balance	date	reached	

a  stage  which  permits  a  reasonable  assessment  of  the  existence  or  otherwise  of  economically 

recoverable	reserves,	and	active	and	significant	operations	in,	or	in	relation	to,	the	area	of	interest	

are	continuing.

Exploration	 and	 evaluation	 assets	 are	 initially	 measured	 at	 cost	 and	 include	 acquisition	 of	 rights	 to	

explore,	studies,	exploratory	drilling,	trenching	and	sampling	and	associated	activities,	and	an	allocation	

of	depreciation	and	amortisation	of	assets	used	in	exploration	and	evaluation	activities.	General	and	

administrative	costs	are	only	included	in	the	measurement	of	exploration	and	evaluation	costs	where	

they	are	related	directly	to	operational	activities	in	a	particular	area	of	interest.

Exploration	and	evaluation	assets	are	assessed	for	impairment	when	facts	and	circumstances	suggest	

that	the	carrying	amount	of	an	exploration	and	evaluation	asset	may	exceed	its	recoverable	amount.	

The	recoverable	amount	of	the	exploration	and	evaluation	asset	(for	the	cash	generating	unit(s)	to	which	

it	has	been	allocated	being	no	larger	than	the	relevant	area	of	interest)	is	estimated	to	determine	the	

extent	of	the	impairment	loss	(if	any).

Where	an	impairment	loss	subsequently	reverses,	the	carrying	amount	of	the	asset	is	increased	to	the	

revised	estimate	of	its	recoverable	amount,	but	only	to	the	extent	that	the	increased	carrying	amount	

does	not	exceed	the	carrying	amount	that	would	have	been	determined	had	no	impairment	loss	been	

recognised	for	the	asset	in	previous	periods.

Where	 a	 decision	 has	 been	 made	 to	 proceed	 with	 development	 in	 respect	 of	 a	 particular	 area	 of	

interest,	the	relevant	exploration	and	evaluation	asset	is	tested	for	impairment	and	the	balance	is	then	

reclassified	to	development.	

Where  an  area  of  interest  is  abandoned,  any  expenditure  carried  forward  in  respect  of  that  area  is 

written	off.

88

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSg)  Income tax

The	income	tax	expense	or	benefit	for	the	period	is	the	tax	payable	or	receivable	on	the	current	period’s	

taxable income or loss based on the applicable income tax rate for each jurisdiction adjusted by changes 

in	deferred	tax	assets	and	liabilities	attributable	to	temporary	differences	and	to	unused	tax	losses.

The	current	income	tax	charge	is	calculated	on	the	basis	of	the	tax	laws	enacted	or	substantively	enacted	

at	the	end	of	the	reporting	period.	Management	periodically	evaluates	positions	taken	in	tax	returns	

with	respect	to	situations	in	which	applicable	tax	regulation	is	subject	to	interpretation.	It	establishes	

provisions	where	appropriate	on	the	basis	of	amounts	expected	to	be	paid	to	the	tax	authorities.

Current tax assets and liabilities for the current and prior periods are measured at the amount expected 

to	be	recovered	from	or	paid	to	the	taxation	authorities.	The	tax	rates	and	tax	laws	used	to	compute	the	

amount	are	those	that	are	enacted	or	substantively	enacted	by	the	balance	date.

Deferred	income	tax	is	provided	on	all	temporary	differences	at	the	balance	date	between	the	tax	bases	

of	assets	and	liabilities	and	their	carrying	amounts	for	financial	reporting	purposes.

Deferred income tax liabilities are recognised for all taxable temporary differences except when:

 — the  deferred  income  tax  liability  arises  from  the  initial  recognition  of  goodwill  or  of  an  asset  or 
liability in a transaction that is not a business combination and that, at the time of the transaction, 

affects	neither	the	accounting	profit	nor	taxable	profit	or	loss;	or

 — the	 taxable	 temporary	 difference	 is	 associated	 with	 investments	 in	 subsidiaries,	 associates	
or	 interests	 in	 joint	 ventures,	 and	 the	 timing	 of	 the	 reversal	 of	 the	 temporary	 difference	 can	 be	

controlled	and	it	is	probable	that	the	temporary	difference	will	not	reverse	in	the	foreseeable	future.

Deferred  income  tax  assets  are  recognised  for  all  deductible  temporary  differences  and  the  carry-

forward	of	unused	tax	assets	and	unused	tax	losses,	to	the	extent	that	it	is	probable	that	taxable	profit	

will	be	available	against	which	the	deductible	temporary	differences	and	the	carry-forward	of	unused	

tax credits and unused tax losses can be utilised, except when:

 — the deferred income tax asset relating to the deductible temporary difference arises from the initial 
recognition of an asset or liability in a transaction that is not a business combination and, at the 

time	of	the	transaction,	affects	neither	the	accounting	profit	nor	taxable	profit	or	loss;	or

 — the	deductible	temporary	difference	is	associated	with	investments	in	subsidiaries,	associates	or	
interests	in	joint	ventures,	in	which	case	a	deferred	tax	asset	is	only	recognised	to	the	extent	that	

it	is	probable	that	the	temporary	difference	will	reverse	in	the	foreseeable	future	and	taxable	profit	

will	be	available	against	which	the	temporary	difference	can	be	recognised.		The	carrying	amount	

of	deferred	income	tax	assets	is	reviewed	at	each	balance	date	and	reduced	to	the	extent	that	it	is	

no	longer	probable	that	sufficient	taxable	profit	will	be	available	to	allow	all	or	part	of	the	deferred	

income	tax	asset	to	be	recognised.

Unrecognised deferred income tax assets are reassessed at each balance date and are recognised to 

the	extent	that	it	has	become	probable	that	future	taxable	profit	will	allow	the	deferred	tax	asset	to	be	

recovered.

Deferred income tax assets and liabilities are measured at the tax rates that are expected to apply to the 

period	when	the	asset	is	recognised	or	the	liability	is	settled,	based	on	tax	rates	(and	tax	laws)	that	have	

been	enacted	or	substantively	enacted	at	the	balance	date.

Income	taxes	relating	to	items	recognised	directly	in	equity	are	recognised	in	equity	and	not	in	profit	

or	loss.

Deferred tax assets and deferred tax liabilities are offset only if a legally enforceable right exists to set 

off current tax assets against current tax liabilities and the deferred tax assets and liabilities relate to 

the	same	taxable	entity	and	the	same	taxation	authority.

89

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSh)  Other taxes

Revenues,	expenses	and	assets	are	recognised	net	of	the	amount	of	GST/VAT,	except	where	the	amount	

of	GST/VAT	incurred	is	not	recoverable	from	the	taxation	authority.	In	these	circumstances	the	GST/

VAT	is	recognised	as	part	of	the	cost	of	acquisition	of	the	asset	or	as	part	of	an	item	of	the	expense.	

Receivables	and	payables	in	the	statement	of	financial	position	are	shown	inclusive	of	GST/VAT.

The	 net	 amount	 of	 GST/VAT	 recoverable	 from,	 or	 payable	 to,	 the	 government	 is	 included	 as	 part	 of	

receivables	or	payables	in	the	statement	of	financial	position.	Cash	flows	are	presented	in	the	statement	

of	cash	flows	on	a	gross	basis,	except	that	the	GST/VAT	component	of	investing	and	financing	activities,	

which	is	receivable	from	or	payable	to	the	government,	is	disclosed	as	operating	cash	flows.

i) 

Impairment of assets 

Goodwill	and	intangible	assets	that	have	an	indefinite	useful	life	are	not	subject	to	amortisation	and	

are	tested	annually	for	impairment,	or	more	frequently	if	events	or	changes	in	circumstances	indicate	

that	they	might	be	impaired.	Other	assets	are	tested	for	impairment	whenever	events	or	changes	in	

circumstances	 indicate	 that	 the	 carrying	 amount	 may	 not	 be	 recoverable.	 An	 impairment	 loss	 is	

recognised	for	the	amount	by	which	the	asset’s	carrying	amount	exceeds	its	recoverable	amount.	The	

recoverable	amount	is	the	higher	of	an	asset’s	fair	value	less	costs	of	disposal	and	value	in	use.	For	the	

purposes	of	assessing	impairment,	assets	are	grouped	at	the	lowest	levels	for	which	there	are	separately	

identifiable	cash	inflows	which	are	largely	independent	of	the	cash	inflows	from	other	assets	or	groups	

of	assets	(cash-generating	units).	Non-financial	assets	other	than	goodwill	that	suffer	an	impairment	

are	reviewed	for	possible	reversal	of	the	impairment	at	the	end	of	each	reporting	period.

j)  Cash and cash equivalents

Cash	comprises	cash	at	bank	and	in	hand.	Cash	equivalents	are	short	term,	highly	liquid	investments	

that	are	readily	convertible	to	known	amounts	of	cash	and	which	are	subject	to	an	insignificant	risk	of	

changes	in	value.	Bank	overdrafts	are	shown	within	borrowings	in	current	liabilities	in	the	statement	of	

financial	position.

For	the	purposes	of	the	statement	of	cash	flows,	cash	and	cash	equivalents	consist	of	cash	and	cash	

equivalents	as	defined	above,	net	of	outstanding	bank	overdrafts.

k)  Trade and other payables

Trade payables and other payables are carried at amortised cost and represent liabilities for goods and 

services	provided	to	the	Group	prior	to	the	end	of	the	period	that	are	unpaid	and	arise	when	the	Group	

becomes	obliged	to	make	future	payments	in	respect	of	the	purchase	of	these	goods	and	services.	

Trade and other payables are presented as current liabilities unless payment is not due within 12 months 

after	the	reporting	period.	They	are	recognised	initially	at	their	fair	value	and	subsequently	measured	at	

amortised	cost	using	the	effective	interest	method.

l)  Provisions

Provisions	are	recognised	when	the	Group	has	a	present	obligation	(legal	or	constructive)	as	a	result	of	

a	past	event,	it	is	probable	that	an	outflow	of	resources	embodying	economic	benefits	will	be	required	

to	settle	the	obligation	and	a	reliable	estimate	can	be	made	of	the	amount	of	the	obligation.	Provisions	

are	not	recognised	for	future	operating	losses.

When	the	Group	expects	some	or	all	of	a	provision	to	be	reimbursed,	for	example	under	an	insurance	

contract,  the  reimbursement  is  recognised  as  a  separate  asset  but  only  when  the  reimbursement 

90

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSis	virtually	certain.	The	expense	relating	to	any	provision	is	presented	in	the	statement	of	comprehensive	

income	net	of	any	reimbursement.

Provisions	are	measured	at	the	present	value	or	management’s	best	estimate	of	the	expenditure	required	to	

settle	the	present	obligation	at	the	end	of	the	reporting	period.

If	the	effect	of	the	time	value	of	money	is	material,	provisions	are	discounted	using	a	current	pre-tax	rate	that	

reflects	the	risks	specific	to	the	liability.	When	discounting	is	used,	the	increase	in	the	provision	due	to	the	

passage	of	time	is	recognised	as	an	interest	expense.

m) Issued capital

Ordinary	shares	are	classified	as	equity.	Incremental	costs	directly	attributable	to	the	issue	of	new	shares	

or	 options	 are	 shown	 in	 equity	 as	 a	 deduction,	 net	 of	 tax,	 from	 the	 proceeds.	 Incremental	 costs	 directly	

attributable to the issue of new shares or options for the acquisition of a new business are not included in the 

cost	of	acquisition	as	part	of	the	purchase	consideration.

n)  Revenue

The	company	currently	has	no	contracts	with	customers.

Interest	income	is	recorded	using	the	effective	interest	method.

o)  Earnings per share

Basic	earnings/loss	per	share	is	calculated	as	net	profit/loss	attributable	to	members,	adjusted	to	exclude	

any	costs	of	servicing	equity	(other	than	dividends)	and	preference	share	dividends,	divided	by	the	weighted	

average	number	of	ordinary	shares,	adjusted	for	any	bonus	element.

Diluted	earnings	per	share	is	calculated	as	net	profit/loss	attributable	to	members,	adjusted	for:

 — costs	of	servicing	equity	(other	than	dividends)	and	preference	share	dividends;

 — the	after	tax	effect	of	dividends	and	interest	associated	with	dilutive	potential	ordinary	shares	that	have	

been recognised as expenses; and

 — other	non-discretionary	changes	in	revenues	or	expenses	during	the	period	that	would	result	from	the	

dilution of potential ordinary shares;

divided	by	the	weighted	average	number	of	ordinary	shares	and	dilutive	potential	ordinary	shares,	adjusted	

for	any	bonus	element.

p)  Share-based payment transactions

i)  Equity settled transactions:

The	 Company	 provides	 benefits	 to	 individuals	 acting	 as,	 and	 providing	 services	 similar	 to,	 employees	

(including	Directors)	of	the	Company	in	the	form	of	share-based	payment	transactions,	whereby	individuals	

render	services	in	exchange	for	shares	or	rights	over	shares	(“equity	settled	transactions”).	

There	is	currently	an	Employee	Share	Option	Plan	(ESOP)	in	place,	which	provides	benefits	to	employees	

(including	Directors)	and	individuals	providing	services	similar	to	those	provided	by	an	employee.		The	cost	

of	these	equity	settled	transactions	is	measured	by	reference	to	the	fair	value	at	the	date	at	which	they	

are	granted.	The	fair	value	is	determined	by	using	the	binomial	method	(which	is	derived	from	the	Black-

Scholes	option	pricing	model	but	is	considered	more	suitable	for	companies	which	do	not	pay	dividends)	

taking	into	account	the	terms	and	conditions	upon	which	the	instruments	were	granted,	as	discussed	in	

note	18.	The	expected	price	volatility	is	based	on	the	historic	volatility	of	the	Company’s	share	price	on	the	

ASX.	

91

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSThe	cost	of	equity	settled	transactions	provided	to	employees	(including	Directors)	by	issue	of	shares	

is	 measured	 by	 reference	 to	 the	 fair	 value	 of	 services	 received	 unless	 this	 cannot	 be	 measured	

reliably,	in	which	case	the	cost	is	measured	by	reference	to	the	fair	value	of	the	shares	issued.	

The  cost  of  equity-settled  transactions  with  non-employees  is  measured  by  reference  to  the  fair 

value	of	goods	and	services	received	unless	this	cannot	be	measured	reliably,	in	which	case	the	cost	

is	measured	by	reference	to	the	fair	value	of	the	equity	instruments	granted.	The	dilutive	effect,	if	

any,	of	outstanding	options	is	reflected	in	the	computation	of	earnings/loss	per	share	(refer	to	note	

6).

In	valuing	equity	settled	transactions,	no	account	is	taken	of	any	performance	conditions,	other	than	

conditions	linked	to	the	price	of	the	shares	of	Highfield	Resources	Limited	(“market	conditions”).

The cost of the equity settled transactions is recognised, together with a corresponding increase in 

equity,	over	the	period	in	which	the	performance	conditions	are	fulfilled,	ending	on	the	date	on	which	

the	relevant	employees	become	fully	entitled	to	the	award	(“vesting	date”).

The	cumulative	expense	recognised	for	equity	settled	transactions	at	each	reporting	date	until	vesting	

date	reflects	(i)	the	extent	to	which	the	vesting	period	has	expired	and	(ii)	the	number	of	awards	that,	

in	the	opinion	of	the	Directors	of	the	Company,	will	ultimately	vest.	This	opinion	is	formed	based	on	

the	best	available	information	at	balance	date.	No	adjustment	is	made	for	the	likelihood	of	the	market	

performance conditions being met as the effect of these conditions is included in the determination 

of	fair	value	at	grant	date.	The	charge	or	credit	to	profit	or	loss	for	a	period	represents	the	movement	

in	cumulative	expense	recognised	at	the	beginning	and	end	of	the	period.

No	expense	is	recognised	for	awards	that	do	not	ultimately	vest,	except	for	awards	where	vesting	is	

conditional	upon	a	market	condition.	Where	the	terms	of	an	equity	settled	award	are	modified,	as	a	

minimum	an	expense	is	recognised	as	if	the	terms	had	not	been	modified.	In	addition,	an	expense	

is	 recognised	 for	 any	 increase	 in	 the	 value	 of	 the	 transaction	 as	 a	 result	 of	 the	 modification,	 as	

measured	at	the	date	of	the	modification.

Where	 an	 equity	 settled	 award	 is	 cancelled,	 it	 is	 treated	 as	 if	 it	 had	 vested	 on	 the	 date	 of	 the	

cancellation,	and	any	expense	not	yet	recognised	for	the	award	is	recognised	immediately.	However,	

if a new award is substituted for the cancelled award, and designated as a replacement award on the 

date	that	it	is	granted,	the	cancelled	and	new	award	are	treated	as	if	they	were	a	modification	of	the	

original	award,	as	described	in	the	previous	paragraph.

ii)  Cash settled transactions:

The	 Company	 may	 also	 provide	 benefits	 to	 employees	 in	 the	 form	 of	 cash-settled	 share-based	

payments,	 whereby	 employees	 render	 services	 in	 exchange	 for	 cash,	 the	 amounts	 of	 which	 are	

determined	by	reference	to	movements	in	the	price	of	the	shares	of	the	Company.

The	cost	of	cash-settled	transactions	is	measured	initially	at	fair	value	at	the	grant	date	using	the	

binomial	 method	 taking	 into	 account	 the	 terms	 and	 conditions	 upon	 which	 the	 instruments	 were	

92

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSgranted.	This	fair	value	is	expensed	over	the	period	until	vesting	with	recognition	of	a	corresponding	

liability.	 The	 liability	 is	 remeasured	 to	 fair	 value	 at	 each	 balance	 date	 up	 to	 and	 including	 the	

settlement	date	with	changes	in	fair	value	recognised	in	profit	or	loss.

q)  Critical accounting estimates and judgements

The  application  of  accounting  policies  requires  the  use  of  judgements,  estimates  and  assumptions 

about	 carrying	 values	 of	 assets	 and	 liabilities	 that	 are	 not	 readily	 apparent	 from	 other	 sources.	 The	

estimates and associated assumptions are based on historical experience and other factors that are 

considered	to	be	relevant.	Actual	results	may	differ	from	these	estimates.

The	estimates	and	underlying	assumptions	are	reviewed	on	an	ongoing	basis.		Revisions	are	recognised	

in	the	period	in	which	the	estimate	is	revised	if	it	affects	only	that	financial	period,	or	in	the	period	of	the	

revision	and	future	periods	if	the	revision	affects	both	current	and	future	periods.

Exploration and evaluation expenditure

The	application	of	the	Group’s	accounting	policy	for	 exploration	and	evaluation	 expenditure	 requires	

judgement	in	determining	whether	future	economic	benefits	are	likely	either	from	future	development	

or	 sale	 or	 where	 activities	 have	 not	 reached	 a	 stage	 which	 permits	 a	 reasonable	 assessment	 of	 the	

existence	of	reserves.		The	determination	of	a	Joint	Ore	Reserves	Committee	(JORC)	resource	is	itself	

an	 estimation	 process	 that	 requires	 varying	 degrees	 of	 uncertainty	 depending	 on	 sub-classification	

and	these	estimates	directly	impact	the	point	of	deferral	of	exploration	and	evaluation	expenditure.	The	

deferral	policy	requires	management	to	make	certain	estimates	and	assumptions	about	future	events	

or	circumstances,	in	particular	whether	an	economically	viable	extraction	operation	can	be	established.	

Estimates	and	assumptions	made	may	change	if	new	information	becomes	available.

r)  New and amended standards adopted by the Group

New	standards	and	amendments	applied	for	the	first	time	for	the	annual	reporting	period	commencing	

1	January	2020	did	not	have	any	impact	on	the	amounts	recognised	in	the	current	or	prior	periods	and	

are	not	expected	to	significantly	affect	future	periods.

s)  New standards and interpretations not yet adopted

Certain	new	accounting	standards	and	interpretations	have	been	published	that	are	not	mandatory	for	

31	December	2020	reporting	periods	and	have	not	been	early	adopted	by	the	Group.	These	standards	are	

not	expected	to	have	a	material	impact	on	the	Group	in	the	current	or	future	reporting	periods	and	on	

foreseeable	future	transactions.

93

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS3. Expenses

Professional and consultants’ fees

Corporate advisory fees 

Legal fees 

Other 

4. Auditor’s Remuneration

The	auditor	of	Highfield	Resources	Limited	is	PricewaterhouseCoopers	Australia	“PwC”	

Amounts received or due and receivable by the parent auditor for:

- an audit or review of the financial report 

- other services 

Remuneration	of	other	related	entities	of	“PwC”		

Amounts received or due and receivable by the subsidiary auditor for:

- an audit or review of the financial report 

31 December 2020
$

31 December 2019 
$

(363,567) 

(43,760) 

(94,507) 

(501,834) 

58,386 

- 

29,446 

87,832 

(280,451)

(27,838)

(77,062)

(385,351)

51,276

6,000

29,632

86,908

94

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS 
 
5. Income Tax

a)  Income tax expense

Major component of tax expense for the period: 

Current tax 

Deferred tax 

31 December 2020
$

31 December 2019 
$

- 

- 

- 

-

-

-

b)  Numerical reconciliation between aggregate tax expense recognised in the statement of profit or loss and other 

comprehensive income and tax expense calculated per the statutory income tax rate

The	tax	on	the	Group’s	loss	before	tax	differs	from	the	theoretical	amount	that	would	arise	using	the	applicable	tax	rate	prevailing	in	the	coun-

tries in which the Group operates as follows: 

Loss from continuing operations before income tax expense 

Tax calculated at domestic tax rates applicable to profit/(losses) in the respective countries 
(Spain 28.0%, Australia 30.0%) 

Non-deductible expenses 

Net income tax benefit not brought to account 

Income tax expense 

c)  Deferred tax

The	following	deferred	tax	balances	have	not	been	brought	to	account:

(24,390,718) 

(7,264,637) 

179,915 

7,084,722 

- 

(7,526,084)

(2,282,815)

262,466

2,020,349

-

Net deferred tax asset not recognised (at respective tax rates)  

14,207,701 

7,432,072

d)  Unused tax losses 

Unused tax losses 

The	benefit	for	tax	losses	will	only	be	obtained	if:

30,734,747 

27,844,538

i)  the	Company	derives	future	assessable	income	of	a	nature	and	of	an	amount	sufficient	to	enable	the	benefit	from	the	deductions	for	

the losses to be realised;

ii)  the Company continues to comply with the conditions for deductibility imposed by tax legislation; and

iii)  no	changes	in	tax	legislation	adversely	affect	the	Company	in	realising	the	benefit	from	the	deductions	for	the	losses.	

95

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS 
 
 
6. Loss per Share

31 December 2020
$

31 December 2019 
$

Loss used in calculating basic and diluted EPS  

(24,390,718)  

(7,526,084)  

Weighted average number of ordinary shares used in calculating basic loss per share 

329,539,585 

329,525,003

Number of Shares

Effect of dilution:

Share options 

- 

-

Adjusted weighted average number of ordinary shares used in calculating diluted loss per share 

329,539,585 

329,525,003

Basic and diluted loss per share (cents) 

(7.40) 

(2.28) 

There is no impact from 22,820,330 options outstanding at 31 December 2020 (31 December 2019: 22,836,150) on the earnings per share calculation 

because	they	are	non-dilutive.	These	options	could	potentially	dilute	basic	EPS	in	the	future.	There	have	been	no	transactions	involving	ordinary	

shares	 or	 potential	 ordinary	 shares	 that	 would	 significantly	 change	 the	 number	 of	 ordinary	 shares	 or	 potential	 ordinary	 shares	 outstanding	

between	31	December	2020	and	the	date	of	completion	of	these	financial	statements.

7. Cash and Cash Equivalents

Reconciliation of cash

Cash at bank 

Reconciliation of operating loss after tax to net cash flow from operations

Loss after tax 

Non-cash and non-operating items in operating loss after tax:

Share-based payments 

Net (gain)/loss on foreign exchange  

Impairment of deferred exploration and evaluation expenditure 

Depreciation 

Change in assets and liabilities

Decrease/(increase) in trade and other receivables 

(Decrease)/increase in trade and other payables 

Net cash used in operating activities 

20,202,057 

39,980,018

(24,390,718) 

(7,526,084)

1,875,964 

(568,899) 

18,721,810 

37,313 

1,509,534 

(370,121) 

(3,185,117) 

2,334,854

133,722

493,503

55,203

(65,524)

1,439,398

(3,134,928)

96

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS 
 
8. Other Receivables

Current

GST receivable 

VAT receivable 

Deposits  

Non-current

Guarantees 

31 December 2020
$

31 December 2019 
$

41,642 

210,237 

40,237 

292,116 

490,692 

490,692 

47,443

653,338

37,771

738,552

516,733

516,733

GST/VAT	receivable	and	other	receivables	are	non-interest	bearing	and	generally	receivable	on	terms	between	30	and	45	days.	They	are	neither	

past	due	nor	impaired.	The	amount	is	fully	collectible.	Due	to	the	short	term	nature	of	these	receivables,	their	carrying	value	is	assumed	to	

approximate	their	fair	value.	Guarantees	and	deposits	represent	amounts	provided	to	third	parties.		

9. Property, Plant and Equipment

Cost 

Accumulated depreciation and impairment 

Net carrying amount 

Movements in Property, Plant and Equipment

Opening balance 

Additions 

Net exchange differences on translation 

Depreciation charge for the period 

Closing balance 

663,294 

(573,437) 

89,857 

116,726 

10,273 

171 

(37,313) 

89,857 

658,279

(541,553)

116,726

121,566

51,959

(1,596)

(55,203)

116,726

97

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS 
 
10. Deferred Exploration and Evaluation Expenditure

31 December 2020 
$

31 December  2019 
$

Exploration and Evaluation expenditure - at cost

Opening balance 

Exploration and evaluation expenditure incurred during the period 

Net exchange differences on translation 

Impairments 

Closing balance 

116,966,324 

15,480,973 

(1,429,015) 

(18,721,810) 

112,296,472 

105,421,745

13,115,579

(1,077,497)

(493,503)

116,966,324

The	Company	was	advised	in	the	fourth	quarter	of	2018	that	the	second	three	year	extension	application	for	the	Adiós	and	Quiñones	permits	

within	the	Sierra	del	Perdón	tenement	area	had	been	rejected	by	the	mining	department	of	the	Government	of	Navarra.	The	Company	appealed	

this	 decision	 in	 2019.	 In	 the	 fourth	 quarter	 of	 2020,	 the	 Company	 was	 advised	 that	 the	 second	 three	 year	 extension	 application	 for	 the	

Ampliación	de	Adiós	permit,	the	other	permit	within	the	Sierra	del	Perdón	tenement	area,	had	also	been	rejected	by	the	mining	department	of	

the	Government	of	Navarra.	The	Company	appealed	this	decision	in	the	same	quarter,	in	line	with	the	ongoing	process	of	the	other	two	Sierra	

del	Perdón	permits.	Based	on	local	Spanish	legal	advice,	the	continued	lack	of	a	resolution	to	the	appeals	is	not	seen	as	a	reflection	on	the	

merits	of	the	appeals,	nor	does	it	represent	a	significant	change	with	an	adverse	effect	on	the	entity.	

With regard to the Pintanos tenement area, although a three year extension to the drilling permit at Molineras 1 was granted during the year, the 

award	of	the	permits	at	Molineras	2	and	Puntarrón	remains	outstanding,	more	than	six	years	since	the	original	applications	were	submitted.

The	 Company	 believes	 the	 outstanding	 permits	 will	 be	 awarded	 for	 both	 projects	 in	 due	 course.	 	 Nonetheless,	 an	 impairment	 expense	 of	

$18,721,810	(2019:	$493,503)	was	recorded	at	the	half	year	in	relation	to	the	Sierra	del	Perdón	and	Pintanos	areas	of	interest,	representing	

expenses	previously	deferred	in	relation	to	this	project.	

The	impairment	recognised	that	under	AASB	6	Exploration	for	and	Evaluation	of	Mineral	Resources,	the	extended	period	of	permit	applications	

brings	into	question	Geoalcali’s	right	of	tenure	and	increases	uncertainty	as	to	the	likelihood	that	the	carrying	value	of	$13,109,629	for	Sierra	del	

Perdón	and	$5,612,181	for	Pintanos	will	be	recovered	in	full	from	successful	development	or	by	sale.	In	view	of	this,	and	taking	into	account	the	

increasing	focus	on	the	Muga	Project,	the	Company	believed	it	was	prudent	to	impair	the	total	carrying	value	of	$18,721,810.	The	impairment	has	

no	impact	on	the	consolidated	cash	flow	in	the	year	ended	31	December	2020.			

The	ultimate	recoupment	of	costs	carried	forward	for	exploration	and	evaluation	expenditure	is	dependent	on	the	successful	development	and	

commercial	exploitation	or	sale	of	the	respective	mining	areas.

11. Trade and Other Payables

Trade payables 

Other payables 

Accruals 

1,129,613 

26,919 

3,358,063 

4,514,595 

2,046,145

27,196

3,266,310

5,339,651

Trade	payables,	other	payables	and	accruals	are	non-interest	bearing	and	generally	payable	on	terms	between	30	and	45	days.	Due	to	the	short	

term	nature	of	these	payables,	their	carrying	value	is	assumed	to	approximate	their	fair	value.

98

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS 
12. Issued Capital

a)  Issued and paid up capital

Issued and fully paid 

b)  Movements in ordinary shares on issue

Opening Balance 

Shares issued1 

Transaction costs on share issue 

1 December 2020

31 December 2020 
$

31 December  2019 
$

172,653,405 

172,618,930

31 December 2020

31 December 2019

Number of shares

$

Number of shares

$

329,525,003 

172,618,930 

329,525,003 

172,618,930

75,168 

- 

34,475 

- 

- 

- 

-

-

329,600,171 

172,653,405 

329,525,003 

172,618,930

 — 75,168	ordinary	shares	were	issued	during	the	year	ended	31	December	2020	as	consideration	for	Directors’	services	in	accordance	

with	the	Directors’	Share	Plan,	as	set	out	in	the	Remuneration	Report	accompanying	this	financial	report.

December 2019

 — No	shares	were	issued	during	the	year	ended	31	December	2019.

c)  Ordinary shares

The	Company	does	not	have	authorised	capital	nor	par	value	in	respect	of	its	issued	capital.	Ordinary	shares	have	the	right	to	receive	

dividends	as	declared	and,	in	the	event	of	a	winding	up	of	the	Company,	to	participate	in	the	proceeds	from	sale	of	all	surplus	assets	in	

proportion	to	the	number	of	and	amounts	paid	up	on	shares	held.		Ordinary	shares	entitle	their	holder	to	one	vote,	either	in	person	or	proxy,	

at	a	meeting	of	the	Company.

d)  Capital risk management

The	 Company’s	 capital	 comprises	 share	 capital	 and	 reserves	 less	 accumulated	 losses	 amounting	 to	 a	 net	 equity	 of	 $128,856,599	 at	 31	

December	2020.	The	Company	manages	its	capital	to	ensure	its	ability	to	continue	as	a	going	concern	and	ultimately	to	optimise	returns	to	

its	shareholders.	The	Company	was	ungeared	at	period	end	and	not	subject	to	any	externally	imposed	capital	requirements.	Refer	to	note	

17	for	further	information	on	the	Company’s	financial	risk	management	policies.

99

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS 
e)  Share Options

As	at	the	date	of	this	report	there	were	22,820,330	unissued	ordinary	shares	under	options.	The	details	of	the	options	are	as	follows:

Number

3,000,000 

1,000,000 

7,000,000 

3,221,170 

1,818,171 

1,546,855 

333,333 

1,622,191 

1,368,757 

333,333 

1,243,186 

333,334 

22,820,330

Exercise Price $

$1.29 

$0.83 

$0.81 

$0.83 

$0.83 

$0.81 

$0.47 

$0.83 

$0.81 

$0.47 

$0.81 

$0.47 

Expiry Date

30 June 2021

30 June 2022

30 June 2023

31 December 2022

31 December 2023

31 December 2023

31 December 2023

31 December 2024

31 December 2024

31 December 2024

31 December 2025

31 December 2025

No	option	holder	has	any	right	under	the	options	to	participate	in	any	other	share	issue	of	the	Company	or	any	other	entity.	The	following	

options	were	issued	during	the	financial	year:	

 — 7,000,000	options	with	an	exercise	price	of	$0.81,	expiring	on	30	June	2023	

 — 1,546,855	options	with	an	exercise	price	of	$0.81,	expiring	on	31	December	2023	

 — 333,333	options	with	an	exercise	price	of	$0.47,	expiring	on	31	December	2023	

 — 1,368,757	options	with	an	exercise	price	of	$0.81,	expiring	on	31	December	2024	

 — 333,333	options	with	an	exercise	price	of	$0.47,	expiring	on	31	December	2024	

 — 1,243,186	options	with	an	exercise	price	of	$0.81,	expiring	on	31	December	2025	

 — 333,334	options	with	an	exercise	price	of	$0.47,	expiring	on	31	December	2025	

The	following	options	lapsed	during	the	financial	year:	

 — 4,832,221	options	with	an	exercise	price	of	$1.34,	expiring	on	30	June	2025	

 — 7,342,397	options	with	an	exercise	price	of	$1.29,	expiring	on	31	December	2025	

No	options	were	cancelled	during	the	financial	year.	

For	full	details	refer	to	note	18.	

100

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSf)  Summary of Options Granted under the Long Term Incentive (LTI) Plan

Opening Balance  

Granted   

Exercised 

Cancelled  

Lapsed  

31 December 2020

31 December 2019

Average exercise price 
per share option

Number of options

Average exercise price 
per share option

Number of options 

$1.19  

$0.78  

-  

-  

$1.31  

$0.91  

22,836,150  

12,158,798  

-  

-  

(12,174,618)  

22,820,330  

$1.81  

$0.83  

-  

$0.83  

$2.04   

$1.19  

43,749,618 

9,480,508 

- 

(1,818,976) 

(28,575,000) 

22,836,150 

Vested and exercisable at year end  

$0.81  

17,919,529  

$1.02  

7,221,170 

101

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS 
13. Reserves

Share-based payments reserve 

Foreign exchange translation reserve 

Option premium reserve 

Movements in Reserves

Share-based payments reserve

Opening balance 

Share-based payments expense 

Closing balance 

31 December 2020
$

31 December 2019 
$

25,221,088 

4,142,273 

1,000 

29,364,361 

23,345,124 

1,875,964 

25,221,088 

23,345,124

5,784,097

1,000

29,130,221

21,010,270

2,334,854

23,345,124

The	 share-based	 payment	 reserve	 is	 used	 to	 record	 the	 value	 of	 equity	 benefits	 provided	 to	 Directors	 and	 executives	 as	 part	 of	 their	

remuneration	and	non-employees	for	their	goods	and	services.	Refer	to	note	18	for	further	details	of	the	securities	issued	during	the	year	

ended	31	December	2020.

Foreign exchange translation reserve

Opening balance 

Foreign exchange translation difference 

Closing balance 

5,784,097 

(1,641,824) 

4,142,273 

6,772,715

(988,618)

5,784,097

The	foreign	exchange	differences	arising	on	translation	of	foreign	controlled	entities	are	taken	to	the	foreign	exchange	translation	reserve.

Option premium reserve

Opening balance 

Issue of unlisted options 

Closing balance 

The	option	premium	reserve	is	used	to	record	the	amount	received	on	the	issue	of	unlisted	options.

14. Accumulated Losses

Movements in accumulated losses were as follows

Opening balance 

Loss for the period 

Closing balance 

102

1,000 

- 

1,000 

1,000

-

1,000

(48,770,449) 

(24,390,718) 

(73,161,167) 

(41,244,365)

(7,526,084)

(48,770,449)

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS 
15. Directors and Other Key Management Personnel Disclosures

Remuneration of Directors and Other Key Management Personnel

Details	of	the	emoluments	of	the	Directors	and	other	key	management	personnel	of	the	Company	for	the	period	are	as	follows:

31 December 2020
$

31 December 2019 
$

Short term employee benefits 

Share-based payments 

Post-employment  

Total 

1,676,361  

745,811 

5,238 

2,427,410 

2,481,579

1,111,598

10,649

3,603,826

Key	management	personnel	are	defined	as	those	persons	having	authority	and	responsibility	for	planning,	directing	and controlling the major 

activities	of	the	Group,	directly	or	indirectly,	including	any	Director	(whether	executive	or	otherwise)	of	the	Group.

16. Related Party Disclosures

a)  Key management personnel

Please	refer	to	note	15	Directors	and	Other	Key	Management	Personnel	Disclosures.

b)  Subsidiaries

The	consolidated	financial	statements	include	the	financial	statements	of	Highfield	Resources	Limited	and	the	subsidiaries	listed	in	the	

following table:

Name of Entity

KCL Resources Limited 

Geoalcali SLU 

Equity Holding

Country of Incorporation

31 December 2020

31 December 2019

Australia 

Spain 

100% 

100% 

100%

100%

103

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS17. Financial Risk Management

Exposure	to	foreign	currency	risk,	credit	risk,	liquidity	risk	and	interest	rate	risk	arises	in	the	normal	course	of	the	Company’s	business.	The	

Company	uses	different	methods	as	discussed	below	to	manage	these	risks	that	arise	from	these	financial	instruments.	The	objective	is	to	

support	the	delivery	of	the	financial	targets	while	protecting	future	financial	security.

a)  Liquidity Risk

Liquidity	risk	is	the	risk	that	the	Company	will	encounter	difficulty	in	meeting	obligations	associated	with	financial	liabilities.	The	Company	

manages	liquidity	risk	by	maintaining	sufficient	cash	facilities	to	meet	the	operating	requirements	of	the	business	and	where	appropriate	

investing	 excess	 funds	 in	 highly	 liquid	 short	 term	 investments.	 The	 responsibility	 for	 liquidity	 risk	 management	 rests	 with	 the	 Board	 of	

Directors.

Alternatives	 for	 sourcing	 future	 capital	 needs	 include	 the	 Company’s	 cash	 position	 and	 the	 issue	 of	 equity	 instruments,	 as	 well	 as	 debt	

financing.	These	alternatives	are	evaluated	to	determine	the	optimal	mix	of	capital	resources	for	capital	needs.	The	Directors	expect	that	

present	levels	of	liquidity	along	with	future	capital	raising	will	be	adequate	to	meet	expected	capital	needs.

Maturity analysis for financial liabilities

Financial	liabilities	of	the	Company	comprise	trade	and	other	payables.	The	contractual	maturities	of	all	trade	and	other	payables	are	less	

than	6	months.

b)  Interest Rate Risk

The	Group’s	exposure	to	the	risk	of	changes	in	market	interest	rates	relates	primarily	to	cash	and	cash	equivalents	with	a	floating	interest	

rate.

These	financial	assets	with	variable	rates	expose	the	Group	to	cash	flow	interest	rate	risk.	All	other	financial	assets	and	liabilities,	in	the	form	

of	receivables,	security	deposits	and	payables	are	non-interest	bearing.

At	31	December	2020,	the	variable	interest	rate	exposure	of	the	Group	was:

Interest bearing financial instrument

Cash at bank or at hand  

31 December 2020
$

31 December 2019 
$

20,202,057 

39,980,018

The	 Company	 holds	 substantially	 all	 of	 its	 cash	 and	 cash	 equivalents	 in	 Euros,	 being	 the	 primary	 currency	 in	 which	 it	 expects	 to	 make	

expenditure	for	the	development	of	the	Muga	Mine.	In	the	year	ended	31	December	2020	no	interest	was	earned	and	$12,853	was	charged	on	

Euro	balances,	reflecting	the	fact	that	interest	rates	on	Euro	balances	are	negative.		In	2019	interest	earned	on	Australian	dollar	balances	

totalled	$566	and	charges	on	Euro	balances	were	$60,018.	

The	Group	currently	does	not	engage	in	any	hedging	or	derivative	transactions	to	manage	interest	rate	risk.

104

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSInterest rate sensitivity

The	Company’s	interest	rate	sensitivity	is	determined	by	the	amount	of	cash	it	holds	in	Euros	and	the	Euro	interest	rate	which	is	currently	

negative	0.4%.			

A	sensitivity	of	75	basis	points	has	been	selected	as	this	is	considered	reasonable	given	the	current	level	of	both	short	term	and	long	term	

interest	rates.	A	0.75%	movement	in	interest	rates	at	the	reporting	date	would	have	increased	or	decreased	the	post	tax	loss	by	the	amounts	

shown	below	based	on	the	average	amount	of	interest	bearing	financial	instruments	held.	This	analysis	assumes	that	all	other	variables,	in	

particular	foreign	currency	rates,	remain	constant.	The	analysis	is	performed	on	the	same	basis	for	2019. 

Effect on Post Tax Loss ($) 
(Increase)/decrease

Effect on Equity incl. accumulated losses ($) 
Increase/(decrease)

31 December 2020

31 December 2019

31 December 2020

31 December 2019

151,515 

(151,515) 

299,850 

(299,850) 

151,515 

(151,515) 

299,850

(299,850)

Increase 75 basis points 

Decrease 75 basis points 

c)  Credit Risk Exposures

Credit	risk	represents	the	risk	that	the	counterparty	to	the	financial	instrument	will	fail	to	discharge	an	obligation	and	cause	the	Company	to	

incur	a	financial	loss.	The	Company’s	maximum	credit	exposure	is	the	carrying	amounts	in	the	statement	of	financial	position.	The	Company	

holds	financial	instruments	with	credit	worthy	third	parties.		At	31	December	2020,	99%	of	the	Company’s	cash	and	cash	equivalents	were	

held	in	financial	institutions	with	a	rating	from	Standard	&	Poors	of	BBB+	or	above	(long	term).	The	Company	had	no	past	due	or	impaired	

debtors	as	at	31	December	2020.

d)  Foreign Currency Risk

The	Company	undertakes	certain	transactions	denominated	in	foreign	currencies,	hence	exposures	to	exchange	rate	fluctuations	arise.	

Exchange	rate	exposures	may	be	managed	within	approved	policy	parameters	utilising	forward	foreign	exchange	contracts.	The	carrying	

amounts of the Group’s foreign currency denominated monetary assets and monetary liabilities at the balance date expressed in Australian 

dollars were as follows:

Euro 

US dollars 

GB pounds 

Canadian dollars 

Total 

Liabilities ($)

Assets ($)

31 December 2020

31 December 2019

31 December 2020

31 December 2019

4,377,015 

5,223,706 

- 

17,449 

- 

23,240 

14,590 

- 

20,047,095 

12,697 

- 

- 

40,494,872

14,111

-

-

4,394,464 

5,261,536 

20,059,792 

40,508,983

The	monetary	assets	and	liabilities	in	the	table	above	for	the	current	period	include	the	balances	of	the	Company’s	Spanish	subsidiary	as	well	

as	of	the	Company	itself.

105

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSForeign currency sensitivity analysis

The	Company	is	exposed	to	Euro	currency	fluctuations.	The	following	table	details	the	Group’s	sensitivity	to	a	10%	increase	and	decrease	in	

the	Euro	against	the	Australian	dollar	on	the	above	foreign	currency	denominated	monetary	assets	and	liabilities,	expressed	in	Australian	

dollars.		

31 December 2020

Profit or loss 

Other equity 

31 December 2019

Profit or loss 

Other equity 

e)  Fair Value

Euro Movement

Increase ($)

Decrease ($)

1,740,593 

1,740,593 

3,916,383 

3,916,383 

(1,424,120)

(1,424,120)

(3,204,313)

(3,204,313)

The	carrying	amounts	of	current	receivables	and	current	payables	are	considered	to	be	a	reasonable	approximation	of	their	fair	value.		The	

Company	did	not	hold	any	derivative	instruments	measured	at	fair	value	at	31	December	2019	or	31	December	2020.		

18. Share-Based Payments

Share-based	payment	transactions	recognised	as	operational	expenses	in	the	Consolidated	Statement	of	Profit	or	Loss	and	Other	Comprehensive	

Income during the period were as follows:

Options granted during the period 

Options granted in prior periods 

31 December 2020
$

31 December 2019 
$

767,961 

1,108,003 

1,875,964 

1,803,299

531,555

2,334,854

The	Company	operates	an	equity	incentive	plan	known	as	‘Highfield	Resources	Limited	Employee	Long	Term	Incentive	Plan’	(“ELTIP”).	Subject	

to	the	attainment	of	performance	hurdles	and	vesting	conditions	participants	in	this	plan	may	receive	options.	The	objective	of	this	plan	is	to	

assist	in	the	recruitment,	reward,	retention	and	motivation	of	senior	managers.	The	fair	value	at	grant	date	of	options	granted	during	the	period	

was	determined	using	the	binomial	method,	as	described	in	note	2(p),	taking	into	account	the	exercise	price,	the	term	of	the	option,	the	share	

price	at	grant	date,	the	expected	price	volatility	of	the	underlying	share	and	the	risk	free	interest	rate	for	the	term	of	the	option.

106

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS 
The table below summarises options granted during the year ended 31 December 2020:

Grant Date

27/05/2020 

25/06/2020 

25/06/2020 

15/09/2020 

25/06/2020 

15/09/2020 

25/06/2020 

15/09/2020 

Expiry date

Exercise price

Granted during the 
period

Exercised during 
the period

Cancelled during 
the period

Number at end of 
the period

Exercisable at end 
of the period

30/06/2023 

30/06/2023 

31/12/2023 

31/12/2023 

31/12/2024 

31/12/2024 

31/12/2025 

31/12/2025 

$0.81 

$0.81 

$0.81 

$0.47 

$0.81 

$0.47 

$0.81 

$0.47 

 6,000,0001 

 1,000,0002 

 1,546,8553 

 333,3334 

 1,368,7575 

 333,3336 

 1,243,1867 

 333,3348 

 12,158,798  

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

6,000,000 

1,000,000 

1,546,855 

333,333 

1,368,757 

333,333 

1,243,186 

333,334 

6,000,000

1,000,000

1,546,855

333,333

-

-

-

-

12,158,798 

8,880,188

1	 Options	 granted	 to	 Non-Executive	 Directors	 at	 the	 Company’s	 AGM	 on	 27	 May	 2020.	 There	 are	 no	 service	 vesting	 or	 performance	 vesting

conditions	in	respect	of	these	options.

2	Options	granted	to	an	external	consultant	and	Non-Executive	Director	of	Geoalcali	SLU.	There	are	no	service	vesting	or	performance	vesting

conditions	in	respect	of	these	options.

3	Options	granted	to	the	Chief	Financial	Officer	and	other	employees.	The	options	vested	on	satisfaction	of	the	recipients’	continued	employment

vesting	condition	at	31	December	2020.

4	Options	granted	to	the	Chief	Executive	Officer.	The	options	vested	on	satisfaction	of	the	recipients’	continued	employment	vesting	condition

at	31	December	2020.

5	Options	granted	to	the	Chief	Financial	Officer	and	other	employees.	The	options	will	vest	on	satisfaction	of	the	recipients’	continued	employment

vesting	condition	at	31	December	2021.

6	Options	granted	to	the	Chief	Executive	Officer.	The	options	will	vest	on	satisfaction	of	the	recipients’	continued	employment	vesting	condition

at	31	December	2021.

7	Options	granted	to	the	Chief	Financial	Officer	and	other	employees.	The	options	will	vest	on	satisfaction	of	the	recipients’	continued	employment

vesting	condition	at	31	December	2022.

8	Options	granted	to	the	Chief	Executive	Officer.	The	options	will	vest	on	satisfaction	of	the	recipients’	continued	employment	vesting	condition

at	31	December	2022.

The model inputs for options granted during the year ended 31 December 2020 included:

a)  options were granted for no consideration;

b)  expected	lives	of	the	options	range	from	3.1	to	5.5	years;

c)  share	price	at	grant	date	of	$0.420	(27	May	2020),	$0.450	(25	June	2020)	and	$0.525	(15	September	2020);

d)  expected	volatility	from	49.15%	to	49.63%;

e)  expected	dividend	yield	of	Nil;	and

f)  a	risk	free	interest	rate	from	0.23%	to	0.26%.

107

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS 
 
 
The table below summarises options granted during the year ended 31 December 2019:

Grant Date

23/05/2019 

21/06/2019 

21/06/2019 

21/06/2019 

Expiry date

Exercise price

Granted during the 
period

Exercised during 
the period

Cancelled during 
the period

Number at end of 
the period

Exercisable at end 
of the period

30/06/2022 

31/12/2022 

31/12/2023 

31/12/2024 

$0.83 

$0.83 

$0.83 

$0.83 

 1,000,0001 

 3,221,1702 

 2,779,4713 

 2,479,8674 

 9,480,508 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

(961,300)5 

(857,676)5 

1,000,000 

3,221,170 

1,818,171 

1,622,191 

1,000,000

3,221,000

-

-

(1,818,976) 

7,661,532 

4,221,000

1	 Options	 granted	 to	 the	 new	 Non-Executive	 Chairman	 appointed	 at	 the	 Company’s	 AGM	 on	 23	 May	 2019.	 There	 are	 no	 service	 vesting	 or

performance	vesting	conditions	in	respect	of	these	options.

2	Options	granted	to	the	then	Managing	Director,	Chief	Financial	Officer	and	other	employees.	The	options	vested	on	satisfaction	of	the	recipients’

continued	employment	vesting	condition	at	31	December	2019.

3	Options	granted	to	the	then	Managing	Director,	Chief	Financial	Officer	and	other	employees.	The	options	vested,	as	applicable,	on	satisfaction

of	the	recipients’	continued	employment	vesting	condition	at	31	December	2020.

4	 Options	 granted	 to	 the	 then	 Managing	 Director,	 Chief	 Financial	 Officer	 and	 other	 employees.	 The	 options	 will	 vest	 on	 satisfaction	 of	 the

recipients’	continued	employment	vesting	condition	at	31	December	2021.

5	Options	cancelled	relate	to	options	granted	to	the	then	Managing	Director	Mr.	Albert	during	the	period	which	had	a	vesting	condition	of	continuing

employment	on	31	December	2020	and	31	December	2021.	Mr.	Albert’s	resignation	on	31	January	2020,	which	was	announced	on	6	December	

2019,	means	that	this	vesting	condition	would	not	be	fulfilled.

The model inputs for options granted during the year ended 31 December 2019 included:

a)  options were granted for no consideration;

b)  expected	lives	of	the	options	range	from	3.1	to	5.5	years;

c)  share	price	at	grant	date	ranged	from	$0.685	to	$0.900;

d)  expected	volatility	of	58%;

e)  expected	dividend	yield	of	Nil;	and

f)  a	risk	free	interest	rate	of	0.89%.

108

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS 
 
 
19. Geographic Segment Analysis

a) Net interest (paid)/received

Australia 

Spain 

b) Non-current Assets

Australia 

Spain 

31 December 2020
$

31 December 2019 
$

- 

(12,853) 

(12,853) 

- 

112,877,021 

112,877,021 

(59,452)

-

(59,452)

-

117,599,783

117,599,783

20. Significant Events after the Reporting Period

There	have	been	no	significant	events	after	the	reporting	period	requiring	disclosure	in	this	report.

21.  Contingent Assets and Liabilities

There	are	no	known	contingent	assets	or	liabilities	as	at	31	December	2020	(December	2019:	Nil).

22. Dividends

No	dividend	was	paid	or	declared	by	the	Company	in	the	year	ended	31	December	2020	or	the	period	since	the	end	of	the	twelve	months	
financial	period	and	up	to	the	date	of	this	report.	The	Directors	do	not	recommend	that	any	amount	be	paid	by	way	of	dividend	for	the	year	
ended	31	December	2020.

23. Geoalcali Foundation

As	part	of	its	Community	Engagement	Program,	the	Company	established	a	not-for-profit	Spanish	foundation	called	the	Geoalcali	Foundation	
(“Foundation”).	The	Foundation	is	supported	exclusively	by	Geoalcali	and	since	its	inauguration	in	September	2014	has	been	involved	in	over	160	
community	projects.

24. Commitments

At	31	December	2020,	the	Group	had	entered	into	a	number	of	contracts	as	part	of	the	development	of	the	Muga	Potash	Project	located	in	Spain.	
The expected payments in relation to these contracts which were not required to be recognised as liabilities at 31 December 2020 amounted 
to	approximately	$85m.	Of	this	amount	approximately	$80m	will	only	become	commitments	once	Notices	to	Proceed	are	issued	to	equipment	
suppliers,	which	will	only	occur	once	sufficient	permitting	and	financing	has	been	achieved.	In	the	meantime,	the	contracts	are	able	to	be	
terminated	by	the	Company	at	any	point	in	time.	The	amount	payable	following	termination	would	be	approximately	$2.2m.

109

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS 
 
25.  Parent Entity Information

The	following	information	relates	to	the	parent	entity,	Highfield	Resources	Limited,	at	31	December	2020	and	for	the	year	then	ended.	The	

information	presented	here	has	been	prepared	using	consistent	accounting	policies	with	those	presented	in	note	2.

31 December 2020
$

31 December 2019 
$

Current assets 

Total assets 

Current liabilities 

Total liabilities 

Net assets 

Issued capital 

Reserves 

Accumulated losses 

Total Equity 

Loss of the parent entity 

Other comprehensive income for the period 

Total comprehensive loss of the parent entity 

19,642,972 

128,358,389 

(120,131) 

(120,131) 

128,238,258 

172,653,405 

25,222,089 

(69,637,236) 

128,238,258 

(26,416,041) 

- 

(26,416,041) 

39,872,950

153,052,297

(308,437)

(308,437)

152,743,860

172,618,930

23,346,124

(43,221,195)

152,743,860

(8,705,815)

-

(8,705,815)

110

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSDirectors’ Declaration

In	accordance	with	a	resolution	of	the	Directors	of	Highfield	Resources	Limited,	I	state	that:

In the opinion of the Directors:

a)  the	 financial	 statements	 and	 notes	 of	 Highfield	 Resources	 Limited	 for	 the	 year	 ended	 31	 December	 2020	 are	 in	 accordance	 with	 the	

Corporations Act 2001, including:

ii)  complying with Accounting Standards (including the Australian Accounting Interpretations), the Corporations Regulations 2001 and other 

mandatory professional reporting requirements, and

iii)  giving	a	true	and	fair	view	of	the	Group’s	financial	position	as	at	31	December	2020	and	of	its	performance	for	the	financial	year	ended	on	

that date, and

d)  There	are	reasonable	grounds	to	believe	that	the	Company	will	be	able	to	pay	its	debts	as	and	when	they	become	due	and	payable,	and

e)  the	financial	statements	and	notes	also	comply	with	International	Financial	Reporting	Standards	as	disclosed	in	note	2(b).

This	declaration	has	been	made	after	receiving	the	declaration	by	the	Chief	Executive	Officer	and	the	Chief	Financial	Officer	required	to	be	made	in	

accordance	with	sections	of	295A	of	the	Corporations	Act	2001	for	the	year	ended	31	December	2020.

On behalf of the Board

Richard Crookes 

Independent Non-Executive Chairman

Adelaide, Australia

30 March 2021

111

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSAuditor’s Independence Declaration

Auditor’s Independence Declaration 
As lead auditor for the audit of Highfield Resources Limited for the year ended 31 December 2020, I 
declare that to the best of my knowledge and belief, there have been:  

(a) 

no contraventions of the auditor independence requirements of the Corporations Act 2001 in 
relation to the audit; and 

(b) 

no contraventions of any applicable code of professional conduct in relation to the audit. 

This declaration is in respect of Highfield Resources Limited and the entities it controlled during the 
period.  

Andrew Forman 
Partner 
PricewaterhouseCoopers 

Adelaide 
30 March 2021 

PricewaterhouseCoopers, ABN 52 780 433 757 
Level 11, 70 Franklin Street, ADELAIDE  SA  5000, GPO Box 418, ADELAIDE  SA 5001 
T: +61 8 8218 7000, F: +61 8 8218 7999, www.pwc.com.au 

Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation. 

112

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS  
  
 
  
  
Independent Auditor’s Report

Independent auditor’s report 
To the members of Highfield Resources Limited 

Report on the audit of the financial report 

Our opinion 

In our opinion: 

The accompanying financial report of Highfield Resources Limited (the Group) and its controlled 
entities (together the Group) is in accordance with the Corporations Act 2001, including: 

(a) 

giving a true and fair view of the Group's financial position as at 31 December 2020 and of its 
financial performance for the year then ended  

(b) 

complying with Australian Accounting Standards and the Corporations Regulations 2001. 

What we have audited 
The Group financial report comprises: 

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• 

the consolidated statement of financial position as at 31 December 2020 

the consolidated statement of changes in equity for the year ended 

the consolidated statement of cash flows for the year ended 

the consolidated statement of profit or loss and other comprehensive income for the year ended 

the notes to the consolidated financial statements, which include significant accounting policies 
and other explanatory information 

the directors’ declaration. 

Basis for opinion 

We conducted our audit in accordance with Australian Auditing Standards. Our responsibilities under 
those standards are further described in the Auditor’s responsibilities for the audit of the financial 
report section of our report. 

We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for 
our opinion. 

Independence 
We are independent of the Group in accordance with the auditor independence requirements of the 
Corporations Act 2001 and the ethical requirements of the Accounting Professional & Ethical 
Standards Board’s APES 110 Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants (including Independence 
Standards) (the Code) that are relevant to our audit of the financial report in Australia. We have also 
fulfilled our other ethical responsibilities in accordance with the Code. 

PricewaterhouseCoopers, ABN 52 780 433 757 
Level 11, 70 Franklin Street, ADELAIDE  SA  5000, GPO Box 418, ADELAIDE  SA 5001 
T: +61 8 8218 7000, F: +61 8 8218 7999, www.pwc.com.au 

Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation. 

113

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS 
  
  
Our audit approach 

An audit is designed to provide reasonable assurance about whether the financial report is free from 
material misstatement. Misstatements may arise due to fraud or error. They are considered material if 
individually or in aggregate, they could reasonably be expected to influence the economic decisions of 
users taken on the basis of the financial report. 

We tailored the scope of our audit to ensure that we performed enough work to be able to give an 
opinion on the financial report as a whole, taking into account the geographic and management 
structure of the Group, its accounting processes and controls and the industry in which it operates. 

Materiality 

• 

For the purpose of our audit we used overall Group materiality of $1.3 million, which represents 
approximately 1% of the Group’s total assets. 

•  We applied this threshold, together with qualitative considerations, to determine the scope of our audit and 
the nature, timing and extent of our audit procedures and to evaluate the effect of misstatements on the 
financial report as a whole. 

•  We chose Group total assets because, in our view, it is the metric against which the performance of the Group 
is most commonly measured given it is in the exploration and evaluation phase and has no production or 
sales. 

•  We utilised a 1% threshold based on our professional judgement, noting it is within the range of commonly 

acceptable thresholds. 

Audit Scope 

•  Our audit focused on where the Group made subjective judgements; for example, significant accounting 

estimates involving assumptions and inherently uncertain future events. 

• 

The Group audit is planned and led by our Group audit team in Australia. Given the Group’s principal 
operating entity Geoalcali SLU and its management and financial reporting function are based in Pamplona 
in Spain, we engaged component auditors in Spain to perform audit procedures over the financial 
information of that entity. Audit procedures were performed by the Group audit team over the consolidation 
process and balances recorded at a Group level. The audit work carried out in Spain, together with the 
additional procedures performed at Group level, in our view provided sufficient evidence to express an 
opinion on the Group financial report as a whole. 

•  We ensured the audit teams, both in Australia and Spain, had the appropriate skills and competencies. 

114

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS 
 
 
Key audit matters 

Key audit matters are those matters that, in our professional judgement, were of most significance in 
our audit of the financial report for the current period. The key audit matters were addressed in the 
context of our audit of the financial report as a whole, and in forming our opinion thereon, and we do 
not provide a separate opinion on these matters. Further, any commentary on the outcomes of a 
particular audit procedure is made in that context. We communicated the key audit matters to the 
Audit and Risk Committee. 

Key audit matter 

How our audit addressed the key audit matter 

Carrying value of exploration and evaluation 
assets   
(Refer to note 10)  

The Group accounts for exploration and evaluation 
activities in accordance with the policy in note 2(f) of 
the financial report.  

Judgement is required by the Group to determine 
whether there were indicators of impairment of the 
exploration and evaluation assets, due to the need to 
make estimates about future events and circumstances, 
such as whether the resources may be economically 
viable to develop in the future.  

The carrying value of exploration and evaluation assets 
was considered a key audit matter given the financial 
significance of the balance and the significant 
judgements required by the Group in determining the 
carrying amount as outlined above. 

We performed the following procedures amongst 
others:   

•

•

•

•

Evaluated the Group’s assessment that there
had been no indicators of impairment on
projects capitalised at 31 December 2020 with
reference to the requirements of Australian
Accounting Standards.

Considered the latest available information
regarding the projects through inquiries of
management and the directors, and inspection
of press releases.

Inquired of management and the directors as
to whether there had been any changes to, and
obtained evidence to support, the Group’s
right of tenure to the projects. This included
considering the status of licences, to assess
whether the Group retained right of tenure.
Where a licence was pending, we assessed the
Group’s expectation of renewal of the licence.

Tested a sample of current year capitalised
expenditure to source documents and
considered whether they had been accounted
for in accordance with the Group’s accounting
policy and Australian Accounting Standards.

We also evaluated the reasonableness of the disclosures 
against the requirements of Australian Accounting 
Standards. 

115

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSOther information 

The Directors are responsible for the other information. The other information comprises the 
information included in the annual report for the year ended 31 December 2020, but does not include 
the financial report and our auditor’s report thereon. 

Our opinion on the financial report does not cover the other information and accordingly we do not 
express any form of assurance conclusion thereon. 

In connection with our audit of the financial report, our responsibility is to read the other information 
and, in doing so, consider whether the other information is materially inconsistent with the financial 
report or our knowledge obtained in the audit, or otherwise appears to be materially misstated. 

If, based on the work we have performed on the other information that we obtained prior to the date of 
this auditor’s report, we conclude that there is a material misstatement of this other information, we 
are required to report that fact. We have nothing to report in this regard. 

Responsibilities of the Directors for the financial report 

The Directors are responsible for the preparation of the financial report that gives a true and fair view 
in accordance with Australian Accounting Standards and the Corporations Act 2001 and for such 
internal control as the Directors determine is necessary to enable the preparation of the financial 
report that gives a true and fair view and is free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or 
error. 

In preparing the financial report, the Directors are responsible for assessing the ability of the Group to 
continue as a going concern, disclosing, as applicable, matters related to going concern and using the 
going concern basis of accounting unless the Directors either intend to liquidate the Group or to cease 
operations, or have no realistic alternative but to do so. 

Auditor’s responsibilities for the audit of the financial report 

Our objectives are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial report as a whole is free 
from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error, and to issue an auditor’s report that 
includes our opinion. Reasonable assurance is a high level of assurance, but is not a guarantee that an 
audit conducted in accordance with the Australian Auditing Standards will always detect a material 
misstatement when it exists. Misstatements can arise from fraud or error and are considered material 
if, individually or in the aggregate, they could reasonably be expected to influence the economic 
decisions of users taken on the basis of the financial report. 

A further description of our responsibilities for the audit of the financial report is located at the 
Auditing and Assurance Standards Board website at: 
https://www.auasb.gov.au/admin/file/content102/c3/ar1_2020.pdf. This description forms part of 
our auditor's report. 

116

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS 
 
Report on the remuneration report 

Our opinion on the remuneration report 

We have audited the remuneration report included in pages 66 to 79 of the Directors’ report for the 
year ended 31 December 2020. 

In our opinion, the remuneration report of Highfield Resources Limited for the year ended 31 
December 2020 complies with section 300A of the Corporations Act 2001. 

Responsibilities 

The Directors  are responsible for the preparation and presentation of the remuneration report in 
accordance with section 300A of the Corporations Act 2001. Our responsibility is to express an 
opinion on the remuneration report, based on our audit conducted in accordance with Australian 
Auditing Standards.  

PricewaterhouseCoopers  

Andrew Forman 
Partner 

Adelaide 
30 March 2021 

117

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS 
 
118
118

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSASX Additional 
Information

119

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSAdditional	information	required	by	the	Australian	Securities	Exchange	Ltd	and	not	shown	elsewhere	in	this	report	is	as	follows.	The	information	is	

current	as	at	10	March	2021.

Distribution of Share Holders

Ordinary Shares

Number of Holders

Number of Shares

1 - 1,000 

1,001 - 5,000 

5,001 - 10,000   

10,001 - 100,000 

100,001- and over 

TOTAL 

209 

364 

330 

847 

236 

1,986 

There	were	151	holders	of	ordinary	shares	holding	less	than	a	marketable	parcel.

Top Twenty Share Holders

The names of the twenty largest holders of quoted equity securities are listed below:

Name  

J P MORGAN NOMINEES AUSTRALIA PTY LTD 

WWB INVESTMENTS PTY LTD 

MR. WARREN WILLIAM BROWN + MRS. MARILYN HELENA BROWN 

BNP PARIBAS NOMINEES PTY LTD  

MR. DEREK CARTER + MRS. CARLSA CARTER   

CITICORP NOMINEES PTY LTD 

MR. DANIEL EDDINGTON + MRS. JULIE EDDINGTON 

BRING ON RETIREMENT LTD 

MR. CRAIG PETER BALL + MRS. SUZANNE KATHERINE BALL 

MR. BENJAMIN JOHN HAAN  

CELTIC CAPITAL PTE LTD   

MR. MICHAEL ANDREW WHITING + MRS. TRACEY ANNE WHITING  

JONERIC PTY LTD   

PETER DAVID FERGUSON PTY LTD  

WOOTOONA INVESTMENTS PTY LTD 

CRX INVESTMENTS PTY LTD 

KANBAH PTY LTD  

DORICA NOMINEES PTY LTD 

CARINYA INVESTMENTS PTY LTD 

HGT INVESTMENTS PTY LTD 

120

Number of shares 

124,819,8138 

20,009,450 

15,030,550 

14,872,022  

7,721,504 

4,679,253 

3,870,000 

3,424,343  

3,292,384  

3,073,000 

3,000,000 

2,715,718 

2,701,076 

2,567,000 

2,150,538 

2,000,000 

2,000,000 

2,000,000 

1,870,000 

1,750,076 

222,835,018 

86,029

1,091,107

2,712,110

30,631,027

295,079,898

329,600,171

%

37.87

6.07

4.56

4.51 

2.34

1.42

1.17

1.04

 1.00  

0.9

0.91

0.82

0.82

0.78

0.65

0.61

0.61

0.61

0.57

0.53

67.61

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS 
 
 
 
Substantial Shareholders

The	following	table	shows	holdings	of	five	per	cent	or	more	of	voting	rights	in	Highfield	Resources	Limited’s	shares	as	notified	to	the	Company	under	
the	Australian	Corporations	Act	2001,	Section	671B	as	at	10	March	2021.

Tittle  of class  

Registered holder of securities

Identity of person or Group

Date of last notice   Number owned

Percentage 
of total voting 
rights2

Ordinary Shares

JP Morgan Nominees Australia Limited

EMR Capital Investment (No. 2) Pte Ltd1

Ordinary Shares

JP Morgan Nominees Australia Limited

Australian Super Pty Ltd1

Ordinary Shares

Various holders

WWB Investments Pty Ltd1

15/02/2015

28/07/2017

08/11/2017

104,038,875

16,922,983

35,040,000

31.57%

5.13%

10.63%

1  Being the group listed and its associated entities

2	 The	 percentages	 quoted	 are	 based	 on	 the	 total	 voting	 rights	 conferred	 by	 ordinary	 shares	 in	 the	 Company	 as	 at	 10	 March	 2021	 of	 329,600,171.

Unlisted Options

Class 

Options over ordinary shares exercisable at $1.29 on or before 30 June 2021

Number

Holders with more than 20%

3,000,000

Isaac Querub 1,000,000 options; 
Roger Davey 1,000,000 options; and
Brian Jamieson 1,000,000 options.

Options over ordinary shares exercisable at $0.83 on or before 30 June 2022

1,000,000

Richard Crookes 1,000,000 options.

Options over ordinary shares exercisable at $0.83 on or before 31 December 2022

3,221,170

Sonedala Albert 1,114,064 options.

Options over ordinary shares exercisable at $0.83 on or before 31 December 2023

1,818,171 Mike Norris 445,980 options.

Options over ordinary shares exercisable at $0.83 on or before 31 December 2024

1,622,191 Mike Norris 397,905 options.

Options over ordinary shares exercisable at $0.81 on or before 31 December 2023

1,546,855 Mike Norris 376,348 options.

Options over ordinary shares exercisable at $0.81 on or before 31 December 2024

1,368,757 Mike Norris 333,016 options.

Options over ordinary shares exercisable at $0.81 on or before 31 December 2025

1,243,186 Mike Norris 302,463 options.

Options over ordinary shares exercisable at $0.47 on or before 31 December 2023

333,333

Ignacio Salazar 333,333 options.

Options over ordinary shares exercisable at $0.47 on or before 31 December 2024

333,333

Ignacio Salazar 333,333 options.

Options over ordinary shares exercisable at $0.47 on or before 31 December 2025

333,334

Ignacio Salazar 333,334 options.

On-Market Buy Back

There	is	no	current	on-market	buy	back.

Voting Rights

All	ordinary	shares	carry	one	vote	per	share	without	restriction.	Options	have	no	voting	rights.

Use of Proceeds

In	accordance	with	listing	rule	4.10.19,	the	Company	confirms	that	it	has	used	cash	and	assets	in	a	form	readily	convertible	to	cash	in	a	way	consistent	
with	its	business	objectives	during	the	year	ended	31	December	2020.

121

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSSchedule of Tenements

Highfield’s	Spanish	potash	projects	are	located	in	the	Ebro	potash	producing	basin	in	Northern	Spain.	Details	are	shown	in	the	table	below.

Project

Region

Permit Name

Permit Type

Applied

Granted

Sierra del Perdón

Navarra

Quiñones

Investigation

19/07/2011

Sierra del Perdón

Navarra

Adiós

Investigation

19/07/2011

Sierra del Perdón

Navarra

Ampliación de Adiós

Investigation

26/10/2012

Application in 
process

Application in 
process

Application in 
process

Ref#

35760

35770

35880

Area Km2 Holder

Structure

22.88

Geoalcali SLU

100%

59.40

Geoalcali SLU

100%

40.90

Geoalcali SLU

100%

123,18

Vipasca

Navarra

Vipasca

Investigation

06/11/2013

11/12/2014

35900

14.10

Geoalcali SLU

100%

14.10

Navarra

Goyo (area under 
concession progress)

Investigation

19/07/2011

24/12/2012

35780

14.79

Geoalcali SLU

100%

Navarra

Goyo Sur

Investigation

25/07/2014

13/12/2019

35920

8.96

Geoalcali SLU

100%

Aragón

Aragón

Aragón

Fronterizo (area under 
concession process)

Muga (area under 
concession progress)

Muga (area outside 
concession progress)

Investigation

21/06/2012

05/02/2014

Z-3502/N-3585

8.70

Geoalcali SLU

100%

Investigation

29/05/2013

07/04/2014

3500

15.08

Geoalcali SLU

100%

Investigation

29/05/2013

07/04/2014

3500

5.32

Geoalcali SLU

100%

Aragón

Muga Sur

Investigation

25/09/2014

30/06/2020

3524

7.28

Geoalcali SLU

100%

Aragón

Molineras 1

Investigation

20/11/2012

06/03/2014

3495/10

18.20

Geoalcali SLU

100%

60.13

Muga

Muga

Muga

Muga

Muga

Muga

Pintanos

Pintanos

Application in 
process

Application in 
process

3495/20

16.80

Geoalcali SLU

100%

3510

Total

30.24

Geoalcali SLU

100%

65.24

262.65

Aragón

Molineras 2

Investigation

19/02/2013

Pintanos

Aragón

Puntarrón

Investigation

08/05/2014

122

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSProject	locations	are	shown	in	the	following	map*.

SIERRA
DEL PERDÓN

o
r
r

Río E

NA-150

PAMPLONA
NA-32

Paternain

ADIOS

0 1 5

A - 7

N

Noáin

Río Sadar

Tajonar

Embalse de Itoiz

Río Irati

NA-150

Río Erro

Zulueta

Elorz

N-240
Monreal

Imarcoáin

QUIÑONES

Tiebas

Muruarte de Reta

Idocin

Río Elorz

A21

Izco

N-240

AMPLIACIÓN
DE ADIOS

Puente 
la Reina

Enériz

Anorbe

acos
Río Cid

AP15

Río Sansoain

NA-132

NA-132

Tafalla

NA-534

Río A ra g ó n

Río Egúrzanos

a
t
e
r
A
o
í
R

Río Irati

NA-150

Lumbier

r

a

z

a

l

a

R í o   S

Río Irati

MUGA-VIPASCA

Yesa

NA-127

VIPASCA

Rocaforte
NA-132

Sangüesa

N A - 5 4 1 0

GOYO

GOYO SUR

NA-127

MUGA

MUGA SUR
Río Onsella

a
g
r
A
o
í
R

R
í
o

A
r
g

a

SCALE
0 km

r
a
z
a
l
a
S
o
í
R

NA-2131

Navarra

s
é
i
n
i

B

o
í
R

Río Esca

NA-137

Aragón

N-240

EMBALSE DE YESA
FRONTERIZO

Undués de Lerda

PI MUGA

Ruesta

MOLINERAS II
Río Regal

Río Aragón

PINTANOS

MOLINERAS I

PUNTARRÓN

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

105

110

BILBAO

FRANCE

PAMPLONA

LEGEND

PORTUGAL

MADRID

ZARAGOZA

BARCELONA

TARRAGONA

MALAGA

VALENCIA

SPAIN

AFRICA

Province

Passenger 
Train Station

Rail 
Freight Terminal

Airport

NAME

Permit name

Licence Granted

Licence Pending

Project Delimitation

Historical Mine 
Infrastructure

National Highways

Toll Highways

Rail network

O

N

S

E

*The potential quantity and grade of the Exploration Target is conceptual in nature and there has been insufficient exploration to estimate a Mineral Resource and it is

uncertain if further exploration will result in the estimation of a Mineral Resource.

123

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS 
 
 
 
 
Important Information and 
Disclaimers 

Forward Looking Statements

This	 report	 includes	 certain	 ‘forward	 looking	 statements’.	 All	 statements,	 other	 than	 statements	 of	

historical	fact,	are	forward	looking	statements	that	involve	various	risks	and	uncertainties.	There	can	be	

no	assurances	that	such	statements	will	prove	accurate,	and	actual	results	and	future	events	could	differ	

materially	from	those	anticipated	in	such	statements.	

Such information contained herein represents management’s best judgement as of the date hereof based 

on	information	currently	available.	The	company	does	not	assume	any	obligation	to	update	any	forward	

looking	statement.

Competent Person Statement for 
Muga - Vipasca Potash Project

The	Review	of	Operations	contained	within	this	annual	report	was	prepared	by	Mr.	Ignacio	Salazar,	CEO	of	

Highfield	Resources.	The	information	in	this	report	that	relates	to	Ore	Reserves	is	based	on	information	

prepared	 by	 Dr.	 Mike	 Armitage,	 the	 Chairman	 of	 SRK	 Consulting	 (UK)	 Limited.	 Dr.	 Mike	 Armitage	 is	 the	

Competent	 Person	 who	 assumes	 overall	 professional	 responsibility	 for	 the	 Compliance	 Opinion.	 The	

information in this report that relates to Mineral Resources, Exploration Results and Exploration Targets is 

based	on	information	prepared	by	Ms.	Anna	Fardell,	Senior	Consultant	at	SRK	Consulting	(UK)	Limited,	and	

Mr.	Tim	Lucks	Principal	Consultant	at	SRK	Consulting	(UK)	Limited.

Dr.	Mike	Armitage	is	employed	by	SRK	Consulting	(UK)	Limited.	The	information	in	this	report	that	relates	

to	 Exploration	 Results,	 Mineral	 Resources	 or	 Ore	 Reserves	 is	 based	 on	 information	 compiled	 under	 the	

direction	 of	 Dr.	 Mike	 Armitage,	 who	 is	 a	 Member	 the	 Institute	 of	 Materials,	 Metals	 and	 Mining	 (“IMMM”)	

which	is	a	‘Recognised	Overseas	Professional	Organisation’	(“ROPO”)	included	in	a	list	promulgated	by	the	

Australian	Securities	Exchange	(“ASX”)	from	time	to	time.	

Dr.	 Mike	 Armitage	 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	in	the	2012	Edition	of	the	‘Australasian	Code	for	Reporting	of	Exploration	Results,	Mineral	Resources	

and	Ore	Reserves’.	

Dr.	Mike	Armitage	consents	to	the	inclusion	in	this	report	of	the	matters	based	on	this	information	in	the	

form	and	context	in	which	it	appears.

Ms.	Anna	Fardell	is	a	Resource	Geologist	employed	by	SRK	Consulting	(UK)	Limited,	and	has	at	least	five	years’	

experience	in	estimating	and	reporting	Mineral	Resources	relevant	to	the	style	of	mineralisation	and	type	

of	deposit	described	herein.	Ms.	Fardell	is	a	registered	member	of	the	Australian	Institute	of	Geoscientists	

(6555)	and	considered	a	Competent	Person	(CP)	under	the	definitions	and	standards	described	in	the	JORC	

Code	2012.	Ms.	Fardell	takes	responsibility	for	the	Mineral	Resource	Statement	presented	here.	

Ms.	Anna	Fardell	consents	to	the	inclusion	in	this	report	of	the	matters	based	on	her	information	in	the	form	

and	context	in	which	it	appears.

124

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSCompetent Person Statement for Mineral 
Resources and Exploration Targets other than 
the Muga Potash Project

The	Review	of	Operations	contained	within	this	annual	report	was	prepared	by	Mr.	Ignacio	Salazar,	CEO	of	

Highfield	Resources.	The	information	in	this	report	that	relates	to	Mineral	Resources,	Exploration	Results	

and	Exploration	Targets	is	based	on	information	prepared	by	Mr.	José	Antonio	Zuazo	Osinaga,	Technical	

Director	of	CRN,	S.A.;	and	Mr.	Manuel	Jesús	Gonzalez	Roldan,	Geologist	of	CRN,	S.A.

Mr.	José	Antonio	Zuazo	Osinaga	is	a	licensed	professional	geologist	in	Spain,	and	is	a	registered	member	

of the European Federation of Geologists, an accredited organisation to which Competent Persons (CP) 

under JORC Code 2012 Reporting Standards must belong in order to report Exploration Results, Mineral 

Resources,	Ore	Reserves	or	Exploration	Targets	through	the	ASX.	

Mr.	José	Antonio	Zuazo	Osinaga	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	CP	as	

defined	in	the	2012	edition	of	the	JORC	Australasian	Code	for	the	Reporting	of	Exploration	Results,	Mineral	

Resources	and	Ore	Reserves.

Mr.	José	Antonio	Zuazo	Osinaga	and	Mr.		Manuel	Jesús	Gonzalez	Roldan	consent	to	the	inclusion	in	this	

report	of	the	matters	based	on	their	information	in	the	form	and	context	in	which	it	appears.

Muga – Vipasca Mineral Resource Revision 

The Company has prepared an updated MRE for the Project as at 31 December 2020 which has been audited 

by	SRK	Consulting	UK	Ltd.	Refer	to	the	following	page	for	full	details.	

The	updated	Mineral	Resource	Statement	for	the	Project	authored	by	SRK	has	not	changed	materially	from	

the	previous	statement	released	in	June	2018.	The	Mineral	Resource	tonnage	has	increased	by	14.86	Mt	to	

282.26	Mt	and	the	grade	of	the	Mineral	Resource	has	decreased	slightly	from	12.4%	K2O	to	11.8%	K2O.	The	
main reason for these changes is the new drilling in the Vipasca permit area which added new areas to the 

Mineral	Resource.	

In	 addition,	 to	 better	 reflect	 the	 structure	 of	 the	 Muga–Vipasca	 deposit,	 the	 thickness	 interpolation	

parameters	have	been	changed,	in	order	to	produce	a	more	geologically	accurate	model.		

The	 new	 interpolation	 has	 decreased	 the	 thicknesses	 of	 the	 potash	 horizons	 at	 the	 edges	 of	 the	 basin	

which  has  slightly  decreased  the  tonnage  in  the  Muga  permit  area,  while  the  lower  grade  intercepts  in 

Vipasca	have	influenced	the	grades	at	the	western	edge	of	the	Muga	permit,	which	has	slightly	decreased	

the	block	model	grades	at	the	western	edge	of	that	permit.	

The	total	Measured	and	Indicated	Mineral	Resources	have	been	increased	by	2.58	Mt	to	237.3	Mt	with	an	

average	grade	of	12.0%	K2O.	The	Inferred	Mineral	Resources	have	increased	in	tonnage	from	32.6	Mt	to	
44.93	Mt	and	decreased	in	grade	from	12.9%	to	10.8%	K2O.	SRK	does	not	expect	the	changes	in	the	updated	
Mineral	Resource	Statement	to	have	any	material	impact	on	the	current	mine	plan.	

125

HIGHFIELD RESOURCES LIMITED   31 DECEMBER 2020   ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERSSRK Consulting (UK) Limited 
5th Floor Churchill House 
17 Churchill Way 
Cardiff CF10 2HH 
Wales, United Kingdom 
E-mail: enquiries@srk.co.uk 
URL: www.srk.com 
Tel: + 44 (0) 2920 348 150 

External Memorandum 

To: 

Lucia Martin 

From: 

Anna Fardell;  

Company:  Geoalcali S.L. 

Project Number:  UK30954 

Copied to:  Mike Armitage 

Project Title: 

Muga-Vipasca review 

File Ref: 

30954 Muga Vipasca 
MRE Statement 2020 
Final.docx 

Date: 

28 February 2021 

Subject: 

MUGA-VIPASCA MRE 2020 

1 

BACKGROUND 

Geoalcali S.L. (Geoalcali)  has requested  SRK Consulting UK Ltd (SRK) to  audit an updated 
Mineral Resource Estimate (MRE) which has been produced in-house for the Muga Project (the 
Project) and which will supersede the MRE reported for the Project in 2018. 

The  2018  MRE  comprised  mineralisation  in  the  Muga  Licence  area  only.  Since  this  time  an 
additional seven drillholes have been completed in and adjacent to the Vipasca Licence area 
(which borders the northwestern limit of the Muga Licence) with a total meterage of 6,539m. 

The  aim  of  the  drilling  was  to  extend  the  previously  reported  MRE  into  the  Vipasca  Licence 
area.  A structural analysis  of the  Project  has however delineated  a geological feature  at  the 
contact between the two licence areas and this appears to be associated with thinner and lower 
grade potash seams as shown in drillholes V17-03 and V18-05. To the west of this however, in 
the Vipasca License area itself, the potash seams increase again in thickness and grade until 
V16-01 which did not intersect potash and was terminated at a depth of 1022.2m. The drilling 
also delineated the basin edge to the north-northeast of the Vipasca Licence area indicated by 
the presence of faulting and lack of development of the P0 seam.  

In  general,  while  the  stratigraphy  in  the  Vipasca  Licence  area  dips  to  the  southwest  and  is 
conformable with that in the Muga Licence area,  the geology is more complex than the Muga 
Licence  area  and  the  grade  and  thickness  of  the  potash  seams  are  lower.  Despite  these 
differences, however, the potash seams can be correlated with confidence within and between 
these areas and there is sufficient data quantity and quality to enable the Mineral Resource to 
be extended into the Vipasca Licence area as intended. 

Registered Address:  21 Gold Tops, City and County of Newport, NP20 4PG,  
Wales, United Kingdom. 
SRK Consulting (UK) Limited Reg No 01575403 (England and Wales) 

  Group Offices:  Africa 
Asia 
Australia 
Europe 
North America 
South America 

 
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
SRK Consulting 

Muga-Vipasca review – MEMO 

2 

MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATE 

2.1  Exploration Drilling 

Six  of  the  holes  that  have  been  drilled  since  the  last  MRE  was  produced  have  been  in  the 
Vipasca Licence area itself and one, V18-05, was drilled close to the limit of the Muga licence. 
All holes were drilled vertically and the spacing between them varies between 500m and 1100m. 

The statistics for the thicknesses and grades (%K2O) of the potash seams intersected in the 
new drillholes is shown in Table 2-1. This shows that generally the potash seams intersected in 
the Vipasca Licence area are thinner and of lower grade than in the Muga Licence area. 

Table 2-1: 

No 
Intercepts 

Drillhole Statistics for the Vipasca licence 
Average 
Thickness 
(m) 

Max 
Thickness 
(m) 

Min 
Thickness 
(m) 

Min 
%K2O 

Max 
%K2O 

Average 
%K2O 

6 

6 

6 

5 

6 

1.8 

1.2 

1.2 

0.6 

0.1 

4.8 

2.1 

2.1 

3.9 

8.1 

2.8 

1.8 

1.7 

2.0 

3.0 

8.0 

5.2 

5.0 

1.8 

4.2 

14.1 

12.3 

10.9 

14.2 

17.3 

10.3 

9.8 

8.8 

9.4 

10.7 

Seam 

P0 

PA 

PB 

P1 

P2 

2.2  Geological Modelling 

2.2.1  Potash Seam Interpretation 

The geological  modelling approach is consistent with  the  previous approach  adopted for the 
2018 estimate. Six potash seams have been modelled which are stratigraphically, from oldest 
to youngest, P4, P2, P1, PA, PB and P0. The intercepts have been identified lithologically in the 
drillholes  based  on  visual  logging  and  chemical  analysis.  There  is  no  minimum  grade  or 
minimum thickness applied to the drillhole intercepts used to define the model. This approach 
was taken to ensure the model had enough data to represent the continuity of the potash seams 
at the drillhole spacing. 

2.2.2  Thickness Interpolation 

The thickness of the  individual seams was interpolated into  a 25m x 25m  grid  mesh, to best 
honour the fault interpretation, using Inverse Distance to the Power three (IPD3) with a minimum 
of one composite and a maximum of 15 composites. The search ellipse was aligned with the 
basin axis (120°) and had a radius of 4,000m along strike and 2,000m across strike.  

The seam floor surfaces were interpolated by Least Squares to the Power 3 with an isotropic 
search ellipse with a radius of 4,000m. A minimum of one sample and a maximum of 20 samples 
was used in this interpolation. 

The model extents are shown in Table 2-2 below. 

Table 2-2: 

Block Model Origin and Extents for Structural Model 

Axis 

X 
Y 
Z 

Origin 

642000 
4712600 
-1500 

Block Size 

No of Blocks 

Model Extent 

25 
25 
2750 

600 
336 
1 

657000 
4721000 
1250 

30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx 

28 February 2021 

Page 2 of 11 

 
 
 
 
SRK Consulting 

Muga-Vipasca review – MEMO 

The thickness parameters were changed from the previous year and appear to have produced 
a more geologically correct model  with the thickness of the units consistently thinning to the 
basin edges. This has resulted in the creation of thinner areas than previously modelled which 
has led to a slight decrease in volume and tonnes in these areas. 

2.3  Grade Interpolation 

The grades were interpolated into the potash seams by Ordinary Kriging using the previous PB 
variogram parameters adjusted to the variance of the new dataset, Table 2-3. The search ellipse 
was aligned with the principal variogram direction and the axis of the basin (120°). The grades 
(%K2O,  %Na2O,  %MgO,  %CaSO4  and  %  Insolubles)  were  estimated  in  two  passes.  The 
interpolation parameters used are shown in Table 2-4. A larger block size of 250m x 250m was 
used for the grade interpolation as this was considered more appropriate given the wide spacing 
of the drillhole composites. 

Table 2-3: 
Variable 

K2O 
MgO 
Na2O 
CaSO4 
Insolubles 

Table 2-4: 
Search 
Pass 

Normalised PB Variogram Parameters used in Estimation 
Range (m) 

C1 (Partial sill) 

C0 (Nugget) 

0.22 
0.25 
0.26 
0.25 
0.29 

0.78 
0.75 
0.74 
0.75 
0.71 

Along Strike 
2500 
2500 
1200 
1000 
1000 

Across Strike 
500 
1600 
350 
675 
350 

Search Ellipse Parameters 
Azimuth 

Search Radius (m) 

No Samples 

Along Strike 
1500 
2500 

Across Strike 
1000 
1600 

Minimum 
6 
3 

Maximum 
10 
10 

1 
2 

120 

2.4  Model Validation 

The model was visually and statistically validated against the input data and it was found that 
the model compared well with the input data and incorporated an appropriate level of smoothing. 

2.5  Mineral Resource Classification 

2.5.1  Approach 

The  classification  of  the  Muga  area  is  unchanged  since  the  2018  MRE  as  there  is  no  new 
information  in  this  area  of  the  deposit  and  there  has  just  been  a  minor  re-modelling  of  the 
geology. The classification of the Vipasca area has however been assessed by Geoalcali and 
SRK on its own merits as even though it is believed to be an extension of the Muga basin, the 
geology is more complex. 

Specifically this classification has taken into account:- 

• 

• 

• 

• 

the quality and quantity of data used in the estimation; 

the geological knowledge and understanding, focusing on geological and grade continuity 
above the 8% K2O reporting cut-off grade; 

the quality of the geostatistics and interpolated block model; and 

SRK’s experience with other deposits of similar style. 

30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx 

28 February 2021 

Page 3 of 11 

 
 
 
 
SRK Consulting 

Muga-Vipasca review – MEMO 

Quality of Data 

There is no historical drilling in the Vipasca Licence area and  the quality control procedures for 
drilling, logging, sampling and assaying followed on site during the recently completed drilling 
are considered to have produced sufficiently reliable and consistent data to enable the reporting 
of Mineral Resources in the Measured, Indicated and Inferred confidence levels. 

Quantity of Data 

The Vipasca Licence area has been drilled to an irregular grid of between 500 m and 1,100 m 
with 500 m spacing down dip and up to 1100 m spacing along strike. 

Geological Knowledge and understanding / geological and grade continuity 

The geology  of the  potash horizons has  been shown to  be  more complex  in the more distal 
environment  of  the  Vipasca  Licence  area  and  the  P0,  PA  and  PB  seams  are  not  as  well 
developed  as  they  are  in  the  Muga  Licence  area.  A  geological  feature  occurs  trending 
northwest-southeast  at  the  boundary  between  the  two  areas  and  is  represented  by  poorly 
developed potash seams and steeper dips. Notwithstanding this, the P1 and P2 potash horizons 
have  been  shown  to  be  continuous  geologically  above  a  cut-off  grade  of  8%  K2O  when 
correlated  between  the  drillholes.  The  P0,  PA  and  PB  seams,  however,  only  occur  in  small 
areas above an 8% K2O cut-off grade because they are less well developed. 

Quality of Geostatistics and Grade Interpolation 

Geostatistical analysis previously undertaken on the data collected from drillholes drilled in the 
Muga  Licence  area  produced  variograms  that  could  be  modelled  and  which  reflected  the 
expected continuity within the deposit given the sample spacing relative to the basin extents 
and these were adapted for use in the Vipasca Lice area. The resultant block model validates 
well when visually and statistically compared to the input composite data.  

The application of Ordinary Kriging utilising well modelled variograms gives confidence to the 
local grade estimates especially in well drilled areas where the samples are spaced within the 
range of the variograms. With respect to the geostatistical analysis and grade interpolation, SRK 
considers the estimates to be of sufficient quality for the highest classification to be applied in 
the well drilled areas.  

Mineral Resource Extent 

The Mineral Resource is limited to an extrapolation of 1000 m past the last drillhole where there 
is no geological information, such as the basin bounding faults or barren drillholes which limit 
the  existence  of  potash.  Notwithstanding  this,  the  potash  has  been  well  constrained  by  the 
current drilling and geophysical studies although it remains open at depth to the west. 

2.5.2  Classification Applied 

Vipasca Licence Area 

Due to the relative complexity of the Vipasca Licence area relative to the current drill spacing 
Indicated and Inferred Resources only have been reported for this. 

30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx 

28 February 2021 

Page 4 of 11 

 
 
 
 
SRK Consulting 

Muga-Vipasca review – MEMO 

Indicated Mineral Resources have been reported for those areas of the P1 and P2 seams where 
there is a drill spacing of 1,100 m or less as these seams show good continuity across the area. 
These  areas  visually  reconcile  against  the  input  data  and  have  been  extended  up  to  800 m 
beyond the last drillhole within the geologically defined basin limits. 

Inferred Mineral Resources have been reported for the P0, PA and PB seams as the potash in 
these is less well developed and there is therefore less drilling information to inform the model 
grade estimates in this area. These areas  have been limited to 1,000 m past the last potash 
bearing drillhole and are limited geologically by fault boundaries. 

Muga Licence Area 

The classification approach used for the Muga Licence area remains as previously applied.  

Measured Mineral Resources have been reported in well drilled areas (drill spacing less than 
1000 m)  which  show  the  simplest  geology  and  most  consistent  grade.  The  classification  is 
extended  up  to  800 m  beyond  the  last  drillhole,  dependant  on  the  geological  setting.  These 
areas have been estimated with the maximum number of samples and show good visual and 
statistical reconciliation against the input sample data. 

Indicated Mineral Resources have been reported for the more sparsely drilled areas, up to a 
drill  spacing  of  1,300 m,  in  areas  of  simple  or  moderate  geological  complexity  and  grade 
variability. The areas must also visually reconcile against the input data and are extended up to 
800 m beyond the last drillhole. 

Inferred  Mineral  Resources  are  those  on  the  periphery  of  the  basin  where  there  is  sparse 
information  and  less  reliable  grade  estimates.  These  areas  are  limited  to  an  extrapolation 
distance of 1,000 m past the last potash bearing drillhole and are limited geologically by fault 
boundaries. Inferred Resources are also classified where there is a single intersection within 
the potash horizon. 

3 

MINERAL RESOURCE STATEMENT 

In  order  to  report  Mineral  Resources  in  accordance  with  the  JORC  Code,  it  must  be 
demonstrated  that  the  mineralisation  has  the  potential  for  eventual  economic  extraction.  To 
assess this consideration, SRK has been provided with the likely mining method and associated 
recoveries and costs by the Company.  

The upper horizons, P0 to PB are likely to be mined in a continuous sequence in the central 
part  of  the  Muga  Basin  as  there  is  very  little  interburden  between  them.  In  this  instance  the 
minimum thickness of the total unit P0, PA and PB has been assessed to ensure thinner central 
horizons are not excluded. A minimum thickness of 1.7 m has been applied to this combined 
package of horizons. In other areas where the horizons separate and cannot be mined together 
a  minimum  mining  thickness  of  1.5 m  has  been  applied  on  the  assumption  the  proposed 
equipment can be selective to 1.7 m. 

A minimum thickness of 1.5 m was also applied to the P1, P2 and P4 potash seams in order to 
constrain the Mineral Resources. 

30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx 

28 February 2021 

Page 5 of 11 

 
 
 
 
SRK Consulting 

Muga-Vipasca review – MEMO 

In addition, a cut-off calculation was derived to support the reporting of material above 8% K2O. 
The  horizons  were  then  visually  assessed  to  delineate  contiguous  areas  above  cut-off  and 
ensure they were still mining targets. It is assumed at this stage that the high levels of MgO 
seen in horizon PA could be managed through blending with adjacent horizons. 

The  cut-off  grade  was  derived  using  technical  and  economic  parameters  provided  by  the 
Company.  These  are  shown  in  the  Table  3-1.  SRK  notes  that  the  cut-off  grade  derived  is 
considerably lower than the 8% applied. However, SRK deems a high cut-off grade appropriate 
as the processing recovery used in the calculation is not variable and applies to the average 
grade of the deposit. There is no testwork is available to support processing recoveries of 95% 
for grades lower than 8% K2O and therefore SRK considers it appropriate to apply this limit to 
the Resources reported herein. 

Table 3-1: 

Cut-off Parameters 

Parameters 

Operational Costs 

Processing Recovery 

Mining Cost 
Processing Cost 
Sustaining Capex 
G&A Cost 
Project Capex 
Logistics, Transportation and Port Handling 

Selling Price 

Muriate of Potash 

Unit  

% 

Value  

95 

USD/tore 
USD/tore 
USD/tore 
USD/tore 
USD/tore 
USD/tproduct 

USD/tproduct 

7.2 
8.22 
1.36 
1.02 
7.68 
17 

327 

The  SRK  Mineral  Resource  Statement  is  shown  in  Table  3-2.  The  extent  of  the  Mineral 
Resource is between 180 m and 1400 m below surface and it is contained entirely within the 
Investigation  and  Mining  Permits  held  by  the  Company.  The  Mineral  Resources  have  been 
presented according to licence area. The Mineral Resource Statement was produced in August 
2020 and is based on the information available at that time. The estimate was produced by Ms 
Lucia Martin of Geoalcali S.L under the guidance and review of Ms Anna Fardell, the Competent 
Person who is a member of the Australian Institute for Geoscientists (member number 6555). 

Ms Fardell is a full-time employee of SRK and has sufficient experience which is relevant to the 
style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which she has 
undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined by the JORC Code. 

30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx 

28 February 2021 

Page 6 of 11 

 
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
SRK Consulting 

Muga-Vipasca review – MEMO 

Table 3-2: 

Audited  SRK  Mineral  Resource  Statement  for  the  Muga  Potash  Deposit 
effective date August 2020 

30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx 

28 February 2021 

Page 7 of 11 

ClassificationAreaHorizonDensity (g/cm3)Tonnage (Mt)%K2O%MgO%Na2O% InsolublesTrue Thickness (m)MeasuredMugaP02.110.189.80.225.923.32.0PA2.017.8111.70.824.220.31.7PB2.138.0712.90.226.9193.5P12.220.5312.50.131.517.12.8P22.216.612.90.124.313.43.0Sub-total Measured2.1103.1912.30.326.818.4IndicatedMugaP02.134.4710.10.527.728.54.1PA1.919.4312.4222.820.82.0PB2.117.6911.80.427.420.61.6P12.234.2212.80.130.717.15.6P22.211.7212.90.126143.4Sub-total 2.1117.5311.80.627.521.3VipascaP12.25.7510.70.13017.91.8P22.210.8611.2031.118.72.8Sub-total 2.216.6111030.718.4Sub-total Indicated2.1134.1411.70.527.920.9Measured +MugaP02.144.65100.427.327.33.6IndicatedPA1.937.2412.11.423.520.61.9PB2.155.7612.60.327.119.52.9P12.254.7512.70.13117.14.6P22.228.3212.90.12513.63.2Sub-total 2.1220.7212.00.427.219.9VipascaP12.25.7510.70.13017.91.8P22.210.8611.2031.118.72.8Sub-total 2.216.6111030.718.4Sub-total Measured + Indicated2.1237.3312.00.427.519.8InferredMugaP02.10.39.90.428.328.42.6PA1.90.1611.82.424.321.81.2P12.21.7512.40.129.515.75.0P22.26.0213.10.127.515.33.0P42.27.5513.70.231.717.12.1Sub-total 2.215.7813.20.229.716.5VipascaP02.110.438.90.126.130.62.9PA2.14.29.40.12727.61.6PB2.13.798.4029.225.21.7P12.22.379.5029.419.32.8P22.28.3610.5031.219.65.6Sub-total 2.129.159.40.128.425.4Sub-total Inferred2.244.9310.80.128.822.3Grand TotalMugaP02.144.95100.427.327.33.6PA1.937.412.11.423.520.61.9PB2.155.7612.60.327.119.52.9P12.256.512.70.13117.14.6P22.234.3412.90.125.413.93.1P42.27.5513.70.231.717.12.1Sub-total 2.1236.512.10.427.419.7VipascaP02.110.438.90.126.130.62.9PA2.14.29.40.12727.61.6PB2.13.798.4029.225.21.7P12.28.1210.30.129.818.31.9P22.219.2210.9031.119.13.1Sub-total 2.245.7610029.222.9Total2.1282.2611.80.427.720.2*Insolubles refers to clays, gypsum and sulphates*Numbers have been rounded to reflect the relative level of accuracy and as such totals may include rounding discrepancies*Reported above a cut-off grade of 8% K2O and a mininimum mining thickness (where horizons will be mined separately) of 1.5m 
 
 
 
 
 
SRK Consulting 

Muga-Vipasca review – MEMO 

4 

GRADE-TONNAGE CURVE 

Figure  4-1  shows  the  sensitivity  of  the  mineralisation  that  satisfies  the  minimum  mining 
thickness requirements to cut-off grade inclusive of that material below the cut-off grade used 
to report the above Mineral Resource. All of this mineralisation is above 6% K2O. 

Figure 4-1: 

Grade-Tonnage  Curve  for  Mineralisation  that  satisfies  the  minimum 
mining thickness 

30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx 

28 February 2021 

Page 8 of 11 

11.512.012.513.013.514.014.515.015.50501001502002506789101112131415% K2OTonnage (Mt)% K2O cut-off gradeGrade Tonnage Curve Measured + Indicated 
 
 
 
 
 
 
SRK Consulting 

Muga-Vipasca review – MEMO 

5 

COMPARISON WITH PREVIOUS ESTIMATES 

The updated Mineral Resource Statement for the Project has not changed materially from the 
previous  statement  released  in  June  2018,  as  reproduced  in  Table  5-1.  below.  The  Mineral 
Resource  tonnage  has  increased  by  14.91 Mt  to  282.26 Mt  and  the  grade  of  the  Mineral 
Resource has decreased from 12.4% K2O to 11.8% K2O. The reasons for the decrease in grade 
and additional tonnage are: 

•  New drilling in the Vipasca Licence area has added new areas to the Mineral Resource. 

• 

• 

• 

Lower grade mineralisation was intersected at Vipasca than previously in the Muga Licence 
area. 

The new thickness interpolation has decreased the thicknesses of the potash horizons at 
the edges of the basin which has decreased the tonnage in the Muga Licence area slightly. 

The lower grade intercepts in Vipasca have influence the grades at the western edge of 
the Muga Licence which has decreased the  block model grades at the western edge of 
that licence. 

The Mineral Resource Statement shows that the tonnage in the Muga Licence area is 12.1% 
K2O as opposed to the Vipasca Licence area where the average grade is 10.0% K2O. 

The total Measured and Indicated Mineral Resource has increased by 2.58 Mt and decreased 
in grade by 0.3% K2O which SRK does not expect to have any material impact on the mine plan. 
The  Inferred  Mineral  Resource  has  increased  in  tonnage  from  32.6 Mt  to  44.93 Mt  and 
decreased in grade from 12.9% to 10.8% K2O. This is due to the low-grade mineralisation added 
in the Vipasca Licence area which has been predominantly classified as Inferred. 

30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx 

28 February 2021 

Page 9 of 11 

 
 
 
 
 
SRK Consulting 

Muga-Vipasca review – MEMO 

Table 5-1: 

Audited  SRK  Mineral  Resource  Statement  for  the  Muga  Potash  Deposit 
effective date 30 June 2018 

30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx 

28 February 2021 

Page 10 of 11 

 
 
 
 
 
 
SRK Consulting 

Muga-Vipasca review – MEMO 

6 

CONCLUDING REMARKS 

The drilling completed in the Vipasca Licence area has enabled the Mineral Resource for the 
Project  to  be  extended  into  this  area.  The  geology  of  the  Vipasca  Licence  area  and  the 
northwestern area of the Muga Licence area has however been shown by the drilling to be more 
complex than in the majority of the Muga Licence area and the potash seams are also thinner 
and lower  grade. Given this, the updated MRE  is  not materially different  to that produced in 
2018. Notwithstanding this the work has improved the geological understanding of this area of 
the deposit and the confidence in the Mineral Resource as a whole. 

For and on behalf of SRK Consulting (UK) Limited 

Anna Fardell, 
Senior Resource Geologist, 
Project Manager 
SRK Consulting (UK) Limited 

Mike Armitage, 
Corporate Consultant (Resource Geology), 
Project Director 
SRK Consulting (UK) Limited 

30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx 

28 February 2021 

Page 11 of 11 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
SRK Consulting 

Muga - Vipasca MRE Techical Appendix A 

APPENDIX 

A 

TECHNICAL APPENDIX:  JORC TABLE 1 

30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx 

February, 2021 

Page A1 of A16 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
SRK Consulting 

Muga MRE Review – Appendix A 

Table A-1. JORC Checklist of Assessment and Reporting Criteria 
Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data 
JORC Code explanation 

Criteria 
Sampling 
techniques 

•  Nature  and  quality  of  sampling  (e.g.  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. 

• 

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 (e.g. ‘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  (e.g.  submarine  nodules)  may 
warrant disclosure of detailedinformation. 

Commentary 

•  At  Muga - Vipasca,  11  historic  drillholes  were  drilled  in  the  1980s  and  in  early 

1991.  Detailed  lithology logs and analysis on core were completed. 

• 

36 new holes have been drilled and cored since 2013 by Geoalcali Sociedad Limitada 
(Geoalcali), for a total of 46 holes on the property. 

•  The  information  on  which  HFR  drilling  campaigns  was  based  was  obtained  from  17 
drillholes and two wedged holes (from both Muga and Pintanos projects) drilled in 1990 and 
earlier. Historical exploration data collected by previous exploration efforts and acquired by 
the client, as well as publically available record sources, including technical reports and 
geological reports.  The drilling programme complete in 1989-1990 was outlined in detail 
by E.N. Adaro. The historical programs, in general, were well-documented. 

•  The new drillholes have been geologically logged, photographed, and analysed. 24 out of 
36  of  the  holes  were  geophysically  logged,  18  through  the  mineralised  zone.  Following 
logging  and  photographing,  samples  are  marked  in  0.3  m  intervals  and  numbered  for 
analysis. Core is sawed with hydraulic oil as the lubricating agent; half core is retained and 
shrink-wrapped, and samples to be analysed are bagged and secured with plastic ties and 
boxed for shipping to ALS Global (ALS) for crushing, grinding and splitting. Cored samples 
are analysed by inductively coupled plasma- optical emission spectrometry (ICP-OES) and 
X-ray fluorescence (XRF) by ALS. Sample preparation is in Seville, Spain and analysis work 
is  completed  in  Loughrea,  County  Galway,  Ireland.  The  ALS  laboratories  used  are 
internationally accredited in the procedures and test work carried out. 

•  The historical holes contributed to a Maiden Inferred Mineral Resource in November 2013 
(Agapito  Associates  Inc.)  and  to  several  subsequent  updates  to  the  Mineral  Resource 
estimates,  including  the  one  declared  here.  The  historical  drillholes  containing  potash 
mineralization were sampled using a ‘grooving’ technique. This was completed by sawing 
a shallow ditch or several cuts in the cores surface. The samples were then submitted for 
geochemical  analyses.  570  geochemical  results  are  available  for  the  1989-1990  drilling 
campaign. The results were obtained through the internal POSUSA laboratory and were 
analysed for KCl, MgCl2, NaCl, insolubles, and clay. The intervals listed for these samples 
reflect the thickness of the sample as measured in the drill core; however, true thicknesses 
for the sample intervals is outlined in the historical strip logs to account for structural dip of 

30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx 

º 

Page A2 of A16 

February, 2021 

 
SRK Consulting 

Muga MRE Review – Appendix A 

Criteria 

JORC Code explanation 

Commentary 

the  intervals.  Samples  were  typically  limited  to  30  cm  or  less  to  maintain  good  sample 
resolution.  No  original  analysis  results  are  available  for  the  unknown  former  drilling 
programme (prior to 1980s). Results for Javier-3, Vistana, and Nogueras are summarized 
in the E.N. Adaro report. These drillholes were only analyzed for KCl, and therefore lack 
results pertaining to MgCl2 (to determine carnallite content) or insolubles. It is unknown if 
the  sample  intervals  account  for  true  thicknesses  based  on  structural  dip  or  if  they  are 
simply  reflective  of  the  intervals  as  seen  in  drill  core.  No  sample  length  restrictions  are 
apparent as samples varied in thickness up to 1.74 m. The method of geochemical analyses 
is  currently  unknown  for  both  the  1989-1990  drilling  campaign  and  the  other  historical 
unknown drilling programme. 

•  An attempt to re-survey historical collar locations was partially successful; however, in many 
cases  the  collars  could  not  be  located,  and  therefore  were  not  accurately  re-surveyed. 
Difficulties converting the historical survey results are still noted and some drillholes are 
plotted with limited confidence. 

•  Geophysical wireline data and historical geological reports are of good quality and appeared 

to correlate reasonably well with historical assay results. 

30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx 

º 

Page A3 of A16 

February, 2021 

 
 
SRK Consulting 

Criteria 
Drilling 
techniques 

JORC Code explanation 

Commentary 

Muga MRE Review – Appendix A 

•  Drill  type  (e.g.,  core,  reverse  circulation,  open-  hole 
hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc.) 
and details (e.g., 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.). 

•  Drilling  procedures  are  unknown  from  historical  Javier  holes  drilled  prior  to  1987, 
including  drillholes  Javier-2,  Javier-3,  Vistana,  Nogueras,  Molinar,  and  Undués  de 
Lerda. 

•  The  drilling  programme  completed  in  1989-1990  was  outlined  in  detail  by  Empresa 
Nacional Adaro Investigaciones Mineras (E.N. Adaro 1989–1991). E.N. Adaro, state- 
owned group tasked with exploration and development of Spain’s Mineral Resources, 
produced detailed reports and “reserve” studies of the Javier-Pintanos area. 

•  Historical drilling was completed with the Mayhew 1500 drill rig from June to August 
1989. During this time, JP-1 through JP-4 were completed. Holes were drilled open 
hole  to  core  point.  The  tricone  bit  used  for  open  hole  drilling  was  reduced  through 
stages  from  12  1/4-inch  to  5  7/8-inch  diameter.  Upon  completion,  the  hole  was 
abandoned  and  cemented  through  the  8  1/2-inch  diameter  drillhole.  Approximately 
2,208 m were drilled in Muga, not accounting for some re-drilling in JP-3 and JP-4. For 
JP-3 and JP-4, the mineralised zone was drilled into and not cored for analysis. Both 
holes were re-drilled through the salt section to take the appropriate cores. No record 
of a re-drilled hole is available for JP-4; two sets of analyses were available for JP-3, 
listed as JP-3 and JP-3D. JP-3D was the re-drilled hole and was completely cored. 
Limited deviation data are available for JP-1, JP-2, JP-3, JP-3D, and JP-4 for the lower 
half/salt section and were used in the model. If no deviation surveys were found, then 
the holes were considered to be vertical. 
In 2013, a drilling programme was initiated at Muga. Holes were cored from surface. 
When the top of salt is reached, the mud is re-formulated to a super-saturated brine to 
eliminate or diminish dissolution of the highly soluble evaporite minerals. Drilling has 
been  contracted  to  Geonor  Servicios  Técnicos  S.L.  of  Galicia,  Spain,  using  a 
Christensen  CS3000;  and  Fordia  Golden  Bear  and  Sondeos  y  Perforaciones 
Industriales del Bierzo (SPI) SPIDrill 260. Drilling was supervised by Highfield 
geologists. 

• 

30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx 

º 

Page A4 of A16 

February, 2021 

 
 
SRK Consulting 

Criteria 
Drill sample 
recovery 

JORC Code explanation 

Commentary 

•  Method  of  recording  and  assessing  core  and  chip 

•  Detailed information on core recovery for the historical programme is not available, but 

sample recoveries and results assessed. 

the analysis data are largely complete over the mineralised zones. 

Muga MRE Review – Appendix A 

•  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. 

•  Whether  logging  is  qualitative  or  quantitative  in 
channel,  etc.) 

costean, 

(or 

nature.  Core 
photography. 

•  The  total  length  and  percentage  of  the  relevant 

intersections logged. 

•  Core recovery on the 2013–2019 drilling campaign averaged greater than 95% in Muga 
in  the  mineralised  zones,  although  some  samples  show  dissolution  due  to  under 
saturated brine mud. Typically, these samples are thought to under-report the target 
potassium mineralogy because of the highly soluble nature of those minerals, but it is 
also possible that less desirable or deleterious mineralogy (i.e. MgO) may also under-
report in this situation. 

•  PQ core is the recommended diameter for core, but in some cases the hole is completed 
with  HQ.  Core  sampling  procedure  is  well-documented  in  the  2013–2017  drilling 
program. In total 12 drillholes (455.10 m) were drilled with PQ through the mineralised 
unit, another 19 drillholes (743.9 m) were completed with HQ diameter. 

• 

• 

• 

Lithology  logs  were  completed  for  the  historical  drilling  programs.  The  1989–1990 
drilling programme included Muga and Los Pintanos holes: Javier-3, JP-1, JP-2, JP- 
3D,  JP-4,  PP-2/2B,  and  PP-3.  The  sample  intervals  were  comparable  to  industry 
standards (generally <30 centimetres [cm]), but the methodology is unknown. Thirty 
centimetres is typically used for a maximum sample length for potash in order to assure 
samples are not diluted and confidence in mineralogy is maintained over the interval. 
Sample intervals for the unknown (pre-1987) drilling programme used a much larger 
sampling interval (up to 2.44 m) for Nogueras, Vistana, and Javier-3. 

In the modern program, cuttings were collected from the open holes and the core was 
logged, photographed, sampled, and analysed in approximately 0.3 m lengths. 

In both drilling campaigns 100% of the relevant intersections were lithologically logged. 

30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx 

º 

Page A5 of A16 

February, 2021 

 
 
JORC Code explanation 

Commentary 

Muga MRE Review – Appendix A 

SRK Consulting 

Criteria 
Sub-sampling 
techniques and 
sample 
preparation 

• 

• 

If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half 
or all core 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 
the  sample  preparation 

appropriateness  of 
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 
field 
duplicate/second-half sampling. 

instance 

results 

for 

for 

•  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. 

•  For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF 
instruments,  etc., 
in 
determining  the  analysis  including  instrument  make 
and  model,  reading 
factors 
applied and their derivation, etc. 

the  parameters  used 

times,  calibrations 

•  Nature  of  quality  control  procedures  adopted  (e.g. 
standards,  blanks,  duplicates,  external  laboratory 
checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy 
(i.e. 
lack  of  bias)  and  precision  have  been 
established. 

• 

• 

• 

For  the  historical  holes,  grooved  samples  were  taken  for  analysis  through  the  potash 
mineralisation. These samples were produced by sawing a shallow channel into the core 
surfaces. This is not usually considered good practice, but is sometimes used to keep the 
core  intact.  Independent  technical  advisor  North  Rim  (Stirrett  and  Mayes,  2013) 
reanalysed available holes to test the validity of the historic data, as discussed below in 
“Quality of assay data and laboratory tests.” 

In the 2013–2019 drilling campaign, cored samples were halved and quartered, with a 
quarter sent for analysis. This sampling methodology is the modern industry standard. 
The sample intervals of approximately 0.3 m in length were taken over the length of the 
mineralised  interval.  Cores  were  usually  PQ  (85  millimetres  [mm]),  but  in  the  case  of 
difficult drilling conditions, coring was reduced to HQ (63.5 mm). 
This smaller core diameter is not ideal for sample analysis as some duplicates have 
shown  variability.  To  try  to  mitigate  this,  duplicates  are  selected  from  HQ  as  true 
duplicates rather than on a quarter core sample. Quarter sample duplicates are selected 
for PQ core. In all cases, hole size was reduced to continue drilling in difficult drilling 
conditions (lost circulation) and is not part of normal procedure. 

•  Geochemical results are available for the 1989–1990 drilling campaign, complete with 
360 samples in Muga. The results were obtained through the internal Potasas de Subiza 
S.A. (POSUSA) lab and were analysed for KCl, MgCl2, NaCl, insolubles, and clay. The 
intervals listed for these samples reflect the thickness of the sample as measured in the 
drill core; however, true thicknesses for the sample intervals is outlined in the historical 
strip logs to account for structural dip of the intervals. Samples were typically limited to 
30 cm or less to maintain good sample resolution. 

•  No original sample analyses are available for the pre-1987 drilling program. Results for 
Javier-3,  Vistana  and  Nogueras  are  summarised  from  the  E.N.  Adaro  comprehensive 
reports  (E.N.  Adaro  1989–1991).  These  drillholes  were  only  analysed  for  KCl,  and 
therefore lack results pertaining to MgCl2 (to determine carnallite content) or insolubles. 
The “grooving” technique on the historical sampling was used to minimise destruction of 
core and may not be representative. The method of geochemical analyses used for both 
the 1989–1990 drilling campaign and the pre-1987 drilling programme is unknown as is 
the identity of the laboratory that conducted the geochemical analyses. 

• 

30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx 

º 

Page A6 of A16 

February, 2021 

 
 
SRK Consulting 

Muga MRE Review – Appendix A 

Criteria 

JORC Code explanation 

Commentary 

•  A resampling programme for Javier-Pintanos was carried out by North Rim (Stirrett and 
Mayes, 2013). Re-sampling on Vistana, Nogueras, and Javier-3 was carried out at the 
Litoteca  de  Sondeos  in  Spain,  the  state-run  core  laboratory.  North  Rim  attempted  to 
duplicate the historical sample intervals; their methodology is described below. 

•  For the re-sampling of historical core samples, the start and end of each sample was 
identified using blue corrugated plastic to ensure the proper intervals were selected for 
slabbing. For each sample, a line was drawn across the top after the core was fit together. 
Once the sample intervals were determined, one-quarter of the core was cut for sampling. 
A hand-held circular saw with a diamond-tipped blade was used to cut the core. Once the 
entire interval was cut, the cut surface was wiped down with a damp cloth to remove any 
rock powder generated by cutting. The quarter core was divided into individual samples 
by drawing straight lines across the core diameter in permanent black marker as identified 
by the blue plastic markers. The determination of individual samples was based entirely 
on the historical sample intervals. No additional sampling was completed. As the samples 
were chosen, they were labelled using a numbering scheme that incorporated both the 
drillhole number and a sample number (e.g., J3-583RS). “RS” was incorporated at the 
end of the sample to indicate “re-sample.” Each sample and its corresponding sample 
tag were placed into a waterproof, plastic sample bag and stapled to enclose the sample 
within  the  bag.  Samples  were  placed  into  sturdy  cardboard  boxes  and  packed  with 
styrofoam. Shipping sheets were completed that included well information, box numbers, 
sample  numbers,  and  contact  information  and  accompanied  the  samples  to  the 
Saskatchewan  Research  Council  (SRC)  Laboratories  in  Saskatoon,  Saskatchewan, 
Canada. In the re-sampling program, the correlation plot between the historical samples 
and their re-analysed equivalents has an average difference of 3.68% K2O overall. The 
results indicate a general over-estimation of grade within the historical samples, with 87% 
of the historical samples having higher K2O grade than the re-sampled analyses indicate. 
This is not a systematic difference, but instead indicates that the variation is more likely 
due to sampling technique rather than a problematic analytical technique or procedure. 
• 
In the 2013–2019 sampling program, chemical analysis was by ICP-OES and XRF. 
•  Highfield and ALS, the primary contract laboratory, maintained quality control procedures 
of standards, duplicates and blanks. Internal SRM, blanks and duplicates were inserted 
by Highfield personnel during sample preparation. 

•  ALS  inserted  commercial  standards  BCR-113  and  BCR-114  both  potash  fertilizer 
materials, a MOP (muriate of potash) and SOP (sulfate of potash), respectively, as well 

30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx 

º 

Page A7 of A16 

February, 2021 

 
 
SRK Consulting 

Muga MRE Review – Appendix A 

Criteria 

JORC Code explanation 

Commentary 

Verification 
sampling 
assaying 

of 
and 

•  The  verification  of  significant  intersections  by 
independent  or  alternative  company 

either 
personnel. 

•  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. 

as their own internal standard as a blank material SY-4, a diorite gneiss. 

•  Duplicates were submitted to ALS and show good internal agreement. 
•  Highfield made multiple Standard Reference Material-type (SRM) samples representing 
low-,  medium-,  and  high-grade  (LG,  MG,  HG)  potash  material,  and  they  show  good 
accuracy and precision within a +2 standard deviation envelope based on 30, 31 and 27 
for HG, LG and MG, respectively. The insertion rate is one blank per 50 samples or batch; 
one SRM and one lab duplicate per 20 samples or batch. 

•  Check samples were tested at SRC and show good agreement for K2O values. 

•  The re-sampling programme of historical cores was carried out under the supervision of 
North  Rim  and  documented  in  a  report  to  Highfield.  The  aim  of  the  geochemical  re- 
sampling  programme  was  to  acquire  sufficient  confidence  in  the  historical  chemical 
analyses data to develop a Mineral Resource estimate, to be reported in accordance with 
the  JORC  Code.  Only 
intervals  containing  potash 
mineralisation were available for re-sampling within the project area: Vistana, Nogueras, 
and Javier-3. 

three  drillholes  with  cored 

•  The  available  historical  geophysical  logs  (run  by  Schlumberger)  were  compared 
estimated  K2O  from  natural  gamma  and/or  spectral  gamma  logs  versus  the  assayed 
value, which showed very good agreement. 

•  ALS analysed samples both by ICP and XRF. In general, ICP analysis shows reasonable 
agreement with results produced by XRF, which report, consistently, slightly higher values 
of K2O. Other holes showed similar bias, thereby substantiating testing precision. The 
ICP method is the base method used for grade analysis. 

•  Highfield receives all chemical analyses in .XLS or .CSV format from the laboratories and 
one  person  is  responsible  for  transferring  those  data  into  a  master  database  and 
maintaining the QA/QC monitoring. The results of the QA/QC samples are reviewed by 
Geoalcali and outliers are identified and sent for reanalysis. 

•  A database was built from the historical drillhole information by Highfield and checked 
against the historical reporting of chemical analyses and intervals listed on the lithologic 
logs. 

•  The master database was checked against the ALS-issued Certificates of Analysis. 

30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx 

º 

Page A8 of A16 

February, 2021 

 
 
SRK Consulting 

Criteria 
Location of 
data points 

Data spacing and 
distribution 

Orientation of 
data in relation to 
geological 
structure 

JORC Code explanation 

Commentary 

Muga MRE Review – Appendix A 

•  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. 

•  Specification of the grid system used. 

•  Quality and adequacy of topographic control. 

•  Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. 

•  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 
and 
classifications applied. 

procedure(s) 

estimation 

•  Whether sample compositing has been applied. 

•  Whether 

the  orientation  of  sampling  achieves 
unbiased  sampling  of  possible  structures  and  the 
extent to which this is known, considering 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. 

•  Historical collar locations were re-located in most cases and re-surveyed. Some historical 
collars could not be located as many were drilled on agricultural land. Historical drill hole 
location  maps  consistently  show  locations  and  so  suggest  confidence  in  the  hole 
coordinates. Historical data and maps are referenced to the European Datum 50 (ED50) 
and have been updated to the European Terrestrial Reference System 1989 (ETRS89) 
datum for compatibility with modern survey information. 

•  All new locations from the 2013–2019 drilling programme are surveyed before and after 

drilling by a licensed surveyor. 

•  Exploration drillhole spacing varies between 300-1000 m. 2013-2014 drilling campaigns 
were designed to fall on the historical seismic line traces. This was followed by infill drilling 
to refine the interpretation from previous campaigns. Then current drilling density is 1.66 
DDH/km2 

•  Samples  have  been  composited  over  the  thickness  of  identified  potash  beds  for  the 

reporting of exploration results. 

•  The  drillhole  spacing  and  distribution  are  deemed  adequate  to  establish  geologic  and 
grade  continuity  commensurate  with  the  Mineral  Resource  classification  applied,  as 
discussed  under  “Section  –  Mineral  Resources”  in  this  table.  Geologic  restrictions, 
allowances  for  unknown  geologic  anomalies,  and  downgrades  of  classification  were 
applied to reasonably characterize geologic confidence. 

•  Historical  holes  were  assumed  to  be  vertical  in  the  absence  of  deviation  surveys. 
Deviation  data  show  relatively  vertical  trajectories  in  surveyed  holes.  Data  on  bed 
orientation were incorporated into the database to calculate apparent true thickness. 

•  The deposit is bedded, and historical seismic maps showed evaporite unit propagating to 

the west at increasing depths. 

•  The northern Loiti Fault System and the south Magdalena System delimitate the ore 

deposit, which shows a bearing perpendicular to these structures. 

•  The drilling was orientated vertically as this was expected to be perpendicular to the 
true thickness of the potash units which are gently dipping, and sub-horizontal. 

30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx 

º 

Page A9 of A16 

February, 2021 

 
 
SRK Consulting 

Criteria 
Sample 
security 

JORC Code explanation 

•  The measures taken to ensure sample security. 

Muga MRE Review – Appendix A 

Commentary 
• 

In  the  2013–2019  drilling  program,  Highfield  personnel  maintained  effective  chain  of 
custody procedures for the samples. Core was picked up at the drill site and brought to 
the  secured  warehouse  for  detailed  logging  and  sampling.  Following  sampling  (see 
sections  on  sampling  herein),  sample  bags  and  boxes  were  secured  with  zip  ties  for 
shipping to the laboratory. 

•  There is no detail available on the procedures used to ensure sample security for the 

Audits or 
reviews 

•  The  results  of  any  audits  or  reviews  of  sampling 

• 

techniques and data. 

historical samples. 
Besides the re-sampling programme carried out by North Rim, CPs compared historical 
chemical  analyses  data  to  estimate  K2O  from  geophysical  records.  In  addition,  ALS 
assayed samples both by ICP and XRF and these values were compared as discussed 
in “Verification of sampling and assaying data.” 

30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx 

º 

Page A10 of A16 

February, 2021 

 
 
SRK Consulting 

Muga MRE Review – Technical Appendix A 

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results 

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

Criteria 
Mineral 
tenement and 
land tenure 
status 

JORC Code explanation 
•  Type, 

third  parties  such  as 

reference  name/number, 

location  and 
ownership including agreements or material issues 
joint  ventures, 
with 
partnerships,  overriding 
title 
interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park 
and environmental settings. 

royalties,  native 

•  The  security  of  the  tenure  held  at  the  time  of 
reporting  along  with  any  known  impediments  to 
obtaining a license to operate in the area. 

Commentary 

•  Muga  –  Vipasca  property  comprises  six  permits:  Goyo  (ref.  25780)  and  Vipasca  (ref. 
35900) are granted Investigation Permits (PI) in Navarra. Fronterizo (ref. Z-3502/N-2585) 
straddles the Navarra and Aragón border and its PI was granted 05 February 2014. Muga 
(ref. 3500) is a granted Investigation Permits (PI) in Aragón. Goyo Sur (ref. 35920) and 
Muga  Sur  (ref.  3524)  were  granted  on  13  December  2019  and  on  30  June  2020 
repectively.  All  permits  are  held  100%  by  Geoalcali  S.L,  a  wholly  owned  Spanish 
subsidiary of Highfield Resources. 
Property descriptions and land status were obtained from the list of lands as set forth in 
the documents provided by Highfield. 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

The Competent Persons have reviewed the mineral tenure from documents provided by 
Highfield  including  permitting  requirements,  but  have  not  independently  verified  the 
permitting  status,  legal  status,  ownership  of  the  project  area,  underlying  property 
agreements or permits. 

Exploration and exploitation of mineral deposits and other geological entities in Spain are 
governed  by  the  Mining  Law  22/1973,  which  is  further  governed  by  the  Royal  Decree 
2857/1978. All sub-surface geological structures, rocks, and minerals are considered the 
property of the public domain and are categorised into four sections under the Spanish law 
(A,  B,  C,  and  D),  and  must  have  mining  authority  authorisation  and  supervision  for 
commercial  exploitation.  Section  C  covers  the  minerals  of  interest  for  Highfield,  and  a 
mining  concession  would  need  to  be  awarded  prior  to  exploitation  which  requires  the 
accompaniment of environmental permits and municipal licenses (electrical, water etc.). 
Generally,  exploration  and  investigation  permits  are  applied  for  prior  to  applying  for  a 
mining concession (not legal obligation), and are aimed at determining the potential of the 
area  through  exploration  practices  (drilling,  seismic,  sampling  etc.).  These  are  granted 
through the region’s government/mining authority  where the exploration or investigative 
work will take place. 
Exploration permits (PE) are valid for one year and can be renewed for one additional year. 
A  PE  allows  only  non-intrusive  investigation,  which  is  defined  by  the  various  Spanish 
regions and can vary. 

A PI is good for up to three years and renewable in three-year terms or longer depending 
on the scope of the intended work. Investigation permits carry with them municipal approval 
as  they  are  publicly  released  for  community  discussion.  To  carry  out  work  under  the 
investigation permit, the permittee must contract with the individual the landowners to allow 

30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx 

February, 2021 

Page A1 of A16 

 
 
 
SRK Consulting 

Muga MRE Review – Technical Appendix A 

Criteria 

JORC Code explanation 

Commentary 

Exploration 
done by other 
parties 

•  Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other 

parties. 

for access and occupation of the land during the exploration. 

• 

In order for both types of permits to remain valid, the applicable taxes must be paid and the 
permittee must comply with the applicable regulations and exploration plan approved by 
the mining authority. Investigation permits require assessment reporting which requires the 
permittee to submit working plans, budgets, and initiate work within certain time allotments. 
Exploration and investigation permits can be transferred in whole or in part to other third 
parties with enough technical and financial backing but must be authorised by the proper 
mining authorities in Spain. 

•  The historical drilling programme completed in 1989–1990 was outlined in detail by E.N. 
Adaro (1989–1991). E.N. Adaro, the state-owned group tasked with exploration and 
development of Spain’s Mineral Resources, produced detailed reports and “reserve” 
studies of the Javier-Pintanos area. 

• 

Potash was first discovered in the Ebro Basin in the Catalonia area in 1912 at Suria after 
the  potash  discoveries  in  Germany  (Moore  2012).  Salt  was  first  discovered  through 
drilling,  later  followed  by  four  economic  potash  mining  zones  with  a  combined  total 
thickness of 2.0 to 8.0 m (Stirrett and Mayes 2013). The potash horizons in the area were 
identified to cover approximately 160 km2 at depths of approximately 500 m sub-surface, 
unless they were brought closer to surface by anticlinal or tectonic structures (Stirrett and 
Mayes 2013). Several deposits  were located in the Catalonia area, including,  Cardona, 
Suria, Fodina, Balsareny, Sallent, and Manresa. Several of these areas were developed 
into mines and are all flanked by anticlinal structures. The potash deposits in the Navarra 
region were not located until later, in 1927, through comparative studies to the deposits 
found at Catalonia (Stirrett and Mayes 2013). 

•  Production at Pamplona began in 1963 with a capacity of 250,000 tonnes per  annum 
(tpa) of K2O. A thick carnallite member overlies the sylvinite, so in 1970 a refinery with 
the capacity for 300,000 tpa was built to accommodate for carnallite from the Esparza 
(Stirrett and Mayes 2013). Carnallite mining was ceased in 1977. Inclined ramps for the 
mine  were  located  near  Esparza,  reaching  the  centre  of  the  mine,  with  further  shafts 
located at Beriain, Guendulain and Undiano. In 1982, 2.2 million tonnes of sylvinite were 
extracted with an average K2O grade of 11.7% (Stirrett and Mayes 2013). The operations 
in Navarra were closed in the late 1990s. 

30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx 

February, 2021 

Page A2 of A16 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
SRK Consulting 

Criteria 

Geology 

JORC Code explanation 

Commentary 

Muga MRE Review – Technical Appendix A 

•  Deposit type, geological setting and style of 

mineralisation. 

•  The  Upper  Eocene  potash  deposits  occur  in  the  sub-basins  of  Navarra  and  Aragón 
provinces  within  the  larger  Ebro  Basin.  The  Navarrese  sub-  basin  includes  the  Muga- 
Vipasca  (Javier)  and  adjoining  Los  Pintanos  deposits.  The  first  deposits  in  the  region, 
occurring at the end of the Cretaceous period, were characterised by a regressive period 
with  reddish  continental  deposits.  The  Eocene  is  marked  by  the  beginning  of  tectonic 
compression, causing formation of subsiding basins parallel to the Pyrenees Mountains 
with emersion and erosion in some parts. The different basins are separated by orogenic 
events developing in the north and south as turbidite basin carbonate platforms. Towards 
the end of the Eocene epoch, the sedimentation axis migrated south to the Jaca-Pamplona 
Basin,  on  which  the  Oligocene  materials  were  deposited.  The  pre-evaporitic  basin 
sedimentation occurs in a context of continuous tectonic compression during the Eocene 
and  Oligocene  epochs,  as  synsedimentary  tectonics  of  the  end  of  the  orogeny,  with 
pronounced sediment influx. The influence of the turbidites towards the end of the Eocene 
epoch in the Bartoniense series, are sourced from the east initially into the Pintano Basin 
and contained by the Flexura de Ruesta and then from the northwest into the Basin as the 
Belsue Formation. 

•  This  potash  deposit  contains  a  100  m-thick  Upper  Eocene  succession  of  alternating 

claystone and evaporites (anhydrite, halite, sylvite and carnallite). 
The  evaporites  accumulated  in  the  elongated  basin  at  the  southern  foreland  of  the 
Pyrenean range (Busson and Schreiber 1997). The evaporites overlie marine deposits and 
conclude in a transitional marine to non-marine environment with terrigenous influence. 
Open marine conditions existed in the Eocene-Oligocene epochs, progressing to a more 
restricted  environment  dominated  by  evaporation  and  the  deposition  of  marl,  gypsum, 
halite, and potassium minerals. Later, tectonism and resulting salt deformations formed 
broad anticlines, synclines and overturned beds. The Basin depocentre originated in the 
west, forming against the down-dropping Javier-Undues Syncline. In this area, the salts 
are thick and additional lower, less continuous beds developed in addition to a substantial 
thickness of PB, the uppermost potash mineralised bed. To the east, a broad basement 
high formed resulted in poorly developed or missing lower salt beds; the potash package 
is more compact and some beds are missing, particularly near the Basin edges. 
Basin edge influences include sediment influx, dark clays and light-coloured sand as well 
as  soft  sediment  deformation  and  salt-veining  which  resulted  from  continued  uplift  and 
steepening beds. Basement-related faulting as well as structural influences at the Basin 
edge have resulted in repeated (or overturned) and thickened mineralised beds. 
• 
Two fault systems dominate and bound the sub-basin, to the north by the extension 
of the thrusting  Loiti Fault  and to the south  by the Magdalena  Fault. The Basin  axis is 

30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx 

Page A3 of A16 

February, 2021 

 
 
 
 
 
SRK Consulting 

Muga MRE Review – Technical Appendix A 

Criteria 

JORC Code explanation 

Commentary 

two-dimensional 

defined by the Javier-Undues Syncline. To the east, the Basin climbs to the Flexura de 
Ruesta, a northwest-southeast offset block contemporaneous with evaporite deformation 
that  resulted  in  a  higher  saddle  area  between  the  Muga  and  Pintano  sub-basins. 
Approximately  vertical  faults  parallel  to  the  west  of  the  Flexura  de  Ruesta  have  been 
defined  by 
(Empresa  Nacional  Adaro 
(2D)  seismic  surveys 
Investigaciones Mineras [E.N. Adaro] 1988–1991). Basin continuity to the west-northwest 
has not been roughly defined by seismic surveys. 
A 2D high-resolution  seismic  survey was run for POSUSA in  August–October 1988, by 
CGG over most of what is now the project area. This consisted of 9 lines totalling 55 km 
(Geoalcali 2012). The resulting structure maps for both the top (techo) and bottom (muro) 
of salt were developed by CGG in combination with the regional seismic, field map, satellite 
imagery,  and  drill  hole  data;  however,  this  information  seemed  to  be  unreliable  while 
progressing  in  drilling  campaigns  as  the  density  markers  were  not  confirmed  by  the 
lithologies in the drillholes. The potash-bearing zones lack any velocity/density contrasts 
within the salt; it is not possible to detect potash or map the structure of the zone directly. 
Coverage of the seismic interpretation does not extend to the northwest part of the basin. 

• 

Potash is used to describe any number of potassium salts. By and large, the predominant 
economic potash is sylvite: a KCl usually found mixed with salt to form the rock sylvinite 
which may have a  K2O content  of up to 63% in its purest form.  Carnallite, a potassium 
magnesium chloride (KCl•MgCl2•6H2O), is also abundant, but has K2O content only as 
high  as  17%.  “Carnallite”  is  used  to  refer  to  the  mineral  and  the  rock  interchangeably, 
although “carnallitite” is the more correct terminology for the carnallite and halite mixture. 
Besides  being  a  source  of  lower  grade  potassium,  carnallite  involves  a  more  complex 
production path, so it is less economically attractive. The depositional environment is that 
of a restricted marine basin, influenced by eustasy, sea floor subsidence, and/or uplift and 
sediment input. It is suggested that the basin is a combination of reflux and drawdown. 
Reflux represents a basin isolated from open marine conditions thereby restricting inflow, 
increasing density, and increasing salinity. Drawdown is simple evaporation in an isolated 
basin resulting in brine concentration and precipitation. This is the classic “bulls- eye” model 
(Garrett 1996). In this case, the basin is further influenced by erosion at the basin edges 
due to contemporaneous and post-depositional uplift, resulting in localised shallowing and 
sediment influx (Ortiz and Cabo, 1981). In that classic model, a basin that is cut off from 
open marine conditions will experience drawdown by evaporation in an arid to semi-arid 
environment. In the absence of sediment influx, precipitation will proceed from limestone to 
dolomite to gypsum and anhydrite to halite. Depending on the composition and influences 

30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx 

Page A4 of A16 

February, 2021 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
SRK Consulting 

Muga MRE Review – Technical Appendix A 

Criteria 

JORC Code explanation 

Commentary 

• 

of the brine at that time, the remaining potassium, magnesium, sulfates, and chlorides will 
progress  from  potassium  and  magnesium  sulfates  to  sylvite  and  then  carnallite.  The 
formation  of  sylvite  and  carnallite  are  proposed  herein  as  secondary  and  primary, 
respectively. 
In  the  Muga  –  Vipasca  Project  area,  the  mineralogy  is  dominated  by  sylvinite  and  some 
carnallite appearing as medium red-orange and white, largely coarse crystals in bands and in 
heavily brecciated beds with high insoluble material, largely fine-grained clays, anhydrite and 
marl. The upper potash beds transition to finely banded light brown marls and clays. The 
salts just below the upper potash tend to be dark grey to black. In some lower beds, halite 
becomes brownish, sandy to coarsely granular sand and sandstone as sediment influx from 
the  basin  edges.  In  portions  of  the  halite  beds,  sediment  influx  from  the  basin  edges  is 
seen  as  sandy  to  coarsely  granular  sands  and  sandstones.  The  lower  salt  is  banded, 
exhibits very large cubic crystals and, in some cases, high angles and folding indicative of 
recrystallisation and structural deformation. The literature denotes this salt as the “sal vieja” 
or  “old  salt”  (Ortiz  and  Cabo  1981).  The  evaporite  beds  and  bands,  in  general,  are 
separated  by  fine  to  very  coarse  crystallised  and  recrystallised  salts,  generally  grey, 
sometimes light to medium honey brown or white, with anhydrite blebs, nodules and clasts. 

 30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx  

Page A5 of A16 

.docx 

February, 2021 

 
 
 
 
 
SRK Consulting 

Criteria 
Drill hole 
information 

JORC Code explanation 

•  A  summary  of  all 

information  material 

the 
understanding  of  the  exploration  results  including  a 
tabulation  of  the  following  information  for  all  Material 
drill holes: 

to 

Muga MRE Review – Technical Appendix A 

Commentary 

•  Not applicable. 

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 thecase. 

 30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx  

Page A6 of A16 

.docx 

February, 2021 

 
 
 
 
 
SRK Consulting 

Criteria 
Data 
aggregation 
methods 

Relationship 
between 
mineralisation 
widths and 
intercept 
lengths 

Diagrams 

Muga MRE Review – Technical Appendix A 

Commentary 

•  Not applicable. 

JORC Code explanation 

• 

In  reporting  Exploration  Results,  weighting  averaging 
techniques,  maximum  and/or  minimum  grade 
truncations  (e.g.  cutting  of  high  grades)  and  cutoff 
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 
typical  examples  of  such 
be  stated  and  some 
aggregations should be shown in detail. 

•  The  assumptions  used  for  any  reporting  of  metal 

equivalent values should be clearly stated. 

•  These relationships are particularly important in the 

reporting of 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 
(e.g. ‘down hole length, true width not known’). 

•  Not applicable. 

•  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. 

•  Figures illustrating the Geology, Drilling and relevant mineralisation relating to the Muga- 
Vipasca  and  Pintano  properties  and  the  current  footprint  of  the  declared  Mineral 
Resources are contained within the 2018 Technical Report. 

 30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx  

Page A7 of A16 

.docx 

February, 2021 

 
 
 
 
 
SRK Consulting 

Criteria 
Balanced 
reporting 

Other 
substantive 
exploration 
data 

JORC Code explanation 

Commentary 

•  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 vavoid misleading reporting of Exploration 
Results. 

•  Updated analysis results are presented in previous Highfield ASX releases. 

Muga MRE Review – Technical Appendix A 

•  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, 
rock 
characteristics;  potential  deleterious  or  contaminating 
substances. 

groundwater, 

geotechnical 

and 

•  A 2D high-resolution seismic survey was run for POSUSA in August–October 1988, by 
CGG over most of what is now the project area. This consisted of 9 lines totalling 55 km 
(Geoalcali, 2012). An additional 2D seismic was run at a later date (unknown) increasing 
the total available seismic to 16 lines, totalling 87.3 km (RPS 2013). 

•  RPS of Calgary, Alberta, Canada, completed a re-interpretation of the 2D historical seismic 
lines and profiles on behalf of Highfield. The re-interpretation programme was designed to 
review the overall accuracy of the historical data in terms of good correlation to drillhole 
data and geological intersections, as well as identify any sub-surface structures that may 
adversely  affect  the  salt-bearing  strata  within  the  project  area.  A  total  of  16  lines  were 
reviewed and were tied to wells with historical wireline data from the 2D seismic RPS. The 
paper copies of the seismic were digitized as the original tapes were unavailable. 

•  RPS interpreted that there is no indication of widespread salt removal due to faulting or 
dissolution.  Deep  structural  features  are  noted  across  the  project  area,  and  only  poor 
quality  seismic  data  exist  over  these  features.  A  large-scale  structural  high  is  present 
between Muga and Los Pintanos areas, separating them geologically. 

•  The CPs initially used these structural data, but the historical map is modified and corrected 

to reflect updated drill hole information. 

Further work 

•  The nature and scale of planned further work (e.g. tests 
for lateral extensions or depth extensions or large-scale 
step-out drilling). 

•  The  Muga  -  Vipaca  geotechnical/hydrogeological  drilling  programme  focused  in  the 
declines is still in progress; however, no further exploration drilling is expected in the area, 
until the underground development. 

•  Diagrams  clearly  highlighting  the  areas  of  possible 
extensions, 
geological 
interpretations  and  future  drilling  areas,  provided  this 
information is not commercially sensitive. 

the  main 

including 

 30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx  

Page A8 of A16 

.docx 

February, 2021 

 
 
 
 
 
SRK Consulting 

Muga MRE Review – Technical Appendix A 

Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources 

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

JORC Code explanation 

Commentary 

Criteria 
Database 
integrity 

•  Measures  taken  to  ensure  that  data  has  not  been 
corrupted  by,  for  example,  transcription  or  keying 
errors,  between  its  initial  collection  and  its  use  for 
Mineral Resource estimation purposes. 

•  Data validation procedures used. 

•  Composite values and hole depths/coordinates in the Strat3D geologic block model were 

visually compared (on screen) with values in the database values for accuracy. 

•  Block model grade and thickness results were compared with the drill hole database to 

ensure a realistic representation of the composites in the vicinity of drill holes. 

• 

In modern holes, duplicate and check analysis samples were prepared for select intervals 
in each potash cycle. Duplicate cores were quartered and sent to ALS for analysis. ALS 
incorporated blank, repeat, and potash standard samples in the testing protocol. Check 
samples were sent to a second qualified laboratory (SRC, Canada) to verify results. ALS 
maintains  its  own  internal  procedure  and  chain  of  custody  to  high  industry  standards. 
There was good agreement in the duplicates. 

•  Both ALS and SRC are laboratories of international repute for the analysis of potash. They 
maintain their own QC program. QC measures, and data verification procedures applied, 
include the preparation and analysis of standards, duplicates, and blanks. 

•  Check samples were sent either to ALS and SRC and also showed good agreement. 

•  The  previous  Competent  Persons  from  Agapito  Associates  visited  the  ALS  Laboratory 

Group analysis sample preparation facility in Seville, Spain on 30 August 2013. 

•  The visits were conducted for the purposes of exploration planning, data collection, site 
observation,  core  inspection,  drill  rig  inspection,  chemical  laboratory  inspection,  and 
QA/QC confirmation. 

•  Ms  Anna  Fardell,  a  Member  of  the  Australian  Institute  of  Geoscientists  (6555)  and  an 
employee  of  SRK  Consulting  (UK)  Limited  is  the  Competent  Person  for  the  updated 
Mineral Resource Statement. Ms Fardell visited the Muga Project in July 2017 and visited 
a number of drillhole collars and observed the drilling procedures used at Vipasca P.I., 
and the core storage and sampling procedures in the core yard. 

•  No changes were implemented after the July 2017 visit as all procedures were found to 

be followed diligently and to high industry standards. 

February, 2021 

Site visits 

•  Comment on any site visits undertaken by the 

Competent Person and the outcome of those visits. 

• 

If no site visits have been undertaken indicate why this 
is the case. 

 30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx  

Page A9 of A16 

.docx 

 
 
 
 
SRK Consulting 

Criteria 
Geological 
interpretation 

JORC Code explanation 

Commentary 

Muga MRE Review – Technical Appendix A 

•  Confidence  in  (or  conversely,  the  uncertainty  of)  the 

geological interpretation of the mineral deposit. 
•  Nature of the data used and of any assumptions made. 
•  The effect, if any, of alternative interpretations on 

Mineral Resource estimation. 

•  The use of geology in guiding and controlling 

Mineral Resource estimation. 

•  The factors affecting continuity both of grade and 

geology. 

•  To the southeast and east, the model is bound by a structural limit called Ruesta fault. 

•  To the south, the deposit is bound by the plunging La Magdalena anticline, which is 
delimited by a fault in its southern limb. The current Mineral Resource is limited by 
the  northern  limb  of  Magdalena  anticline  and  does  not  extend  towards  this 
discontinuity, as no drilling has proved the extension. 

•  While  the  stratigraphy  in  the  Vipasca  Licence  area  dips  to  the  southwest  and  is 
conformable  with  that  in  the  Muga  Licence  area,  the  geology  is  more  complex  than  the 
Muga Licence area and the grade and thickness of the potash seams are lower. Despite 
these differences, however, the potash seams can be correlated with confidence within and 
between these areas and there is sufficient data quantity and quality to enable the Mineral 
Resource  to  be  extended  into  the  Vipasca  Licence  area  as  intended.  The  estimated 
Mineral Resources remain open at depth to the west inside the Vipasca permit area. 

•  The extent of the Mineral Resource is between 180 m and 1400 m below surface and it is 

contained entirely within the Investigation and Mining Permits held by the Company 

•  Grade parameters were composited as length-weighted averages of the individual analyses 
over  a  continuous  bed  thickness.  In  most  instances,  top  and  bottom  bed  contacts  are 
gradational,  introducing  some  trade-off  between  grade  and  thickness.  Contacts  were 
selected to maximize thickness while maintaining a composite grade as close as possible 
to  12.0%  K2O  with  a  true  thickness  equal  to  greater  than  1.5  m.  Depending  upon  the 
vertical grade distribution, bed thicknesses less than 1.5 m and composite grades less than 
8.0% K2O were required in some instances to create a robust geologic model. 

•  Structural  dips  were  calculated  from  the  base-of-salt  surface  constructed  from  seismic, 
outcrop, and drill hole data. Dips in individual beds were adjusted locally by stacking the 
variable-thickness interburden and potash beds above the base- of-salt surface. 

•  Drillhole  and  seismic  indicate  generally  predictable  bed  continuity  across  the  property, 
nonetheless variation in potash thickness, grade, and mineralogy between drill holes is 
present.  Faults,  folds,  and  other  structural  disturbances  can  limit  mineralisation  locally. 
Potash quality can be affected by varying depositional environments or structure, including 
depositional  highs,  syngenetic  faulting,  basement  carbonate  mounds,  algal  reefs,  post- 
depositional  gypsum  dewatering,  groundwater  dissolution  along  fault  conduits,  and  by 
other complex features. 

•  At  this  stage  of  the  exploration  programme,  Mineral  Resources  are  classified  as 

Measured, Indicated, and Inferred only. 

February, 2021 

 30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx  

Page A10 of A16 

.docx 

 
 
 
 
 
SRK Consulting 
Dimensions 

•  The  extent  and  variability  of  the  Mineral  Resource 
expressed  as  length  (along  strike  or  otherwise),  plan 
width, and depth below surface to the upper and lower 
limits of the Mineral Resource. 

Muga MRE Review – Technical Appendix A 
•  The mineralisation occurs in potash beds P0, PA, PB, P1, P2, and P4 at least over an area 
spanning approximately 32 km2. Potash bed P3 also appears in the basin, but it does not 
have economic interest. 

•  The mineralisation ranges in depth between 200 m and 1,200 m below surface. P0 ranges 
from 0.6 to 7.8 m in thickness, the grade varies between 0.7-16.1% K2O; the MgO content 
ranges between 0.09-19.8% and the insoluble content between 10.59-25.21%. PA ranges 
from 0.78 to 6.3 m  in thickness, the grade varies  between 0.84-18.27% K2O; the MgO 

 30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx  

Page A11 of A16 

.docx 

February, 2021 

 
 
 
SRK Consulting 

Muga MRE Review – Technical Appendix A 

Criteria 

JORC Code explanation 

Commentary 

content ranges between 0.05-6.11% and the insoluble content between 7.12-28.91%. PB 
ranges from 0.77 to 12.9 m in thickness, the grade varies between 0.32-18.28% K2O; the 
MgO content ranges between 0.08-2.34% and the clay content between 7.68-27.25%. P1 
ranges from 0.83 to 10.5 m in thickness, the grade varies between 5.42-15.26% K2O; the 
MgO content ranges between 0.07-0.21% and the insoluble content between 7.67-15.85%. 
P2 ranges from 1.8 to 8.1 m in thickness, the grade varies between 10.7-15.63% K2O; the 
MgO content ranges between 0.19-0.21% and the insoluble content between 7.17-13.06%. 
P4 intersected in J13-09, has an average thickness of 3.3 m, an average grade of 13.71% 
K2O, an average MgO content of 0.19 and insoluble content of 8.85%. 

•  Secondary grade constituents (MgO, insoluble and halite) were modelled with the block 

model and show a degree of variability similar to K2O grade. 

•  The  grade  and  tonnage  estimates  was  quantitatively  estimated  using  a  computer  3D 
gridded- seam geologic (block) model constructed with Strat3D v 2.2.82.0 software. 
•  Data  utilized  in  the  model  include  historic  and  modern  drillhole  logs  and  chemical 
analyses, historic and modern interpretations of 2D seismic surveys, surface topography 
in  the  form  of  a  digital  elevation  model  (DEM),  permit  boundary  lines  and  historic 
resource analysis. 

•  Grade  parameters  used  in  the  block  model  were  composited  as  length-weighted 

averages of the individual analyses over a continuous bed thickness. 

•  No  drillholes  or  drillhole  data  were  excluded  from  the  model  within  the  basin  limiting 
structures. No sample or composite outliers were identified, and none were excluded, cut, 
or capped in the model. 

•  Bed thicknesses were corrected to true thicknesses for modelling according to local dip 
and  downhole  deviation  survey  data.  Historic  holes  lacking  deviation  surveys  were 
assumed vertical. 

•  The potash beds of interest were gridded into single layers of  25 m2 blocks of variable 
vertical  thickness  representing  the  local  thickness  of  the  respective  potash  bed.  For 
grade estimation, the block size was increased to 250 m2 blocks. 

•  Block true thicknesses was interpolated into 25m blocks by inverse distance cubed. An 
exponent  of  3.0,  instead  of  a  lower  value  such  as  2.0,  was  selected  to  enhance  local 
variability in the model consistent with the variability evident in the drill holes. 

•  The block thickness estimation was conducted using an anisotropic elliptical search radius 
with a major axis of 4,000 m oriented at an azimuth of 120º, parallel to the axis of the basin 

Estimation and 
modelling 
techniques 

•  The  nature  and  appropriateness  of  the  estimation 
technique(s)  applied  and  key  assumptions,  including 
treatment  of  extreme  grade  values,  domaining, 
interpolation  parameters  and  maximum  distance  of 
extrapolation  from  data  points.  If  a  computer  assisted 
estimation method was chosen include a description of 
computer software and parameters used. 

•  The  availability  of  check  estimates,  previous 
estimates  and/or  mine  production  records  and 
whether  the  Mineral  Resource  estimate  takes 
appropriate account of such data. 

•  The  assumptions  made  regarding  recovery  of  by- 

products. 

•  Estimation of deleterious elements or other non- grade 
variables of economic significance (eg sulphur for acid 
mine drainagecharacterisation). 

• 

In the case of block model interpolation, the block size 
in relation to the average sample spacing and the search 
employed. 

•  Any assumptions behind modelling of  selective 

mining units. 

•  Any  assumptions  about  correlation  between 

variables. 

•  Description of how the geological interpretation was 

 30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx  

Page A12 of A16 

.docx 

February, 2021 

 
 
 
 
 
SRK Consulting 

Muga MRE Review – Technical Appendix A 

Criteria 

JORC Code explanation 

Commentary 

used to control the resource estimates. 

and a minor axis of 2,000 m perpendicular to the major axis. 

•  Discussion  of  basis  for  using  or  not  using  grade 

cutting or capping. 

•  The process of validation, the checking process 
used, the comparison of model data to drill hole 
data, and use of reconciliation data if available. 

Moisture 

•  Whether  the  tonnages  are  estimated  on  a  dry  basis  or 
with natural moisture, and the method of determination of 
the moisture content. 

Cutoff 
parameters 

•  The basis of the adopted cutoff grade(s) or quality 

parameters applied. 

•  A maximum of 20 and minimum of 1 drillhole composites within the search ellipse was 
used for estimation. The anisotropic model was used as it reflects the axis of the Muga - 
Vipasca basin and the relative geological continuity observed in the drillholes. 

•  Grade  estimation  was  conducted  by  Ordinary  Kriging  for  the  main  and  the  secondary 
parameters. The maximum variogram range for K2O and MgO is 2,500 m for Na2O is 1,200 
m and for insoluble is 1,000 m. 

•  Tonnages are estimated using variable bulk density of 2.12 g/cm3 based on bulk density 
measurements from core samples; in the case of PA, the seam with higher MgO content, 
a  regression  was  applied  to  calculate  the  density  as  there  was  a  strong  relationship 
between density and MgO content in this seam. There is negligible water within the mineral 
structure in the potash which has no impact on the density. 

•  The mineralisation is dominated by evaporites rich is K2O. 
•  Sylvinite is a mechanical mixture of halite (NaCl) and sylvite (KCl) typically with inclusions 

of insolubles (typically clays) and limited carnallite (KCl·MgCl2·6H2O). 

•  The Company has sourced technical and economic parameters from the recent mining study 
The  assumed  parameters  include  processing  recovery,  mining  and  processing  costs  per 
tonne run of mine, and G&A, logistics to port and freight costs per tonne MOP. A commodity 
price of USD 313/t MOP has been assumed, and mineral royalties have been considered. A 
cut-off grade has been calculated using these assumptions and rounded up to 8%. 

•  SRK  has  verified  the  input  parameters  and  the  cut-off  grade  calculation,  alongside  the 
technical reasoning behind the proposed production scenario. SRK has tested the sensitivity 
of the COG to operating costs and a contingency. SRK is confident that the Mineral Resource 
as reported fulfils the requirement that it should have potential for economic extraction. 

•  No constraints have been applied for insolubles or carnallite (i.e., magnesium) content as it 
is expected the material can be blended to reach the appropriate product specification. 
•  SRK notes that the assumptions and technical and economic parameters will change as 

further technical work is undertaken. 

 30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx  

Page A13 of A16 

.docx 

February, 2021 

 
 
 
 
 
 
SRK Consulting 

Criteria 
Mining factors 
or assumptions 

JORC Code explanation 

Commentary 

Muga MRE Review – Technical Appendix A 

•  The MRE does not include any out-of-bed dilution. 
•  The analysis assumes a base case mining scenario with multi-seam room-and-pillar mining. 

internal 
It 

•  Assumptions made regarding possible mining methods, 
(or, 
if 
minimum  mining  dimensions  and 
is  always 
applicable,  external)  mining  dilution. 
the  process  of  determining 
necessary  as  part  of 
reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to 
consider potential mining methods, but the assumptions 
made regarding mining methods and parameters when 
estimating  Mineral  Resources  may  not  always  be 
rigorous. Where this is the case, this should be reported 
with  an  explanation  of 
the  mining 
assumptions made. 

the  basis  of 

Metallurgical 
factors or 
assumptions 

•  The  basis  for  assumptions  or  predictions  regarding 
metallurgical amenability. It is always necessary as part 
of the process of determining reasonable prospects for 
eventual  economic  extraction  to  consider  potential 
metallurgical  methods,  but  the  assumptions  regarding 
metallurgical 
treatment  processes  and  parameters 
made  when  reporting  Mineral  Resources  may  not 
always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this should 
be  reported  with  an  explanation  of  the  basis  of  the 
metallurgical assumptions made. 

•  The detailed economic analysis supporting reasonable prospects for eventual economic 
extraction  of  the  Mineral  Resource  assumes  processing  with  conventional  crushing, 
flotation and crystallization. 

•  Flotation was used successfully  to process similar sylvinite mineralisation at POSUSA  - 
Adaro’s Navarra and Subiza potash mines at Sierra del Perdón from the 1970s through 
1990s. 

•  Preliminary flotation testing conducted by Geoalcali on sylvinite core from Muga supports 
KCl recoveries in excess of 80%, similar to the historical Navarra and Subiza potash mines 
and sufficient to justify reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction. 80% was 
used for the purposes of calculating the cut-off grade. 

•  High  insolubles  and  high  magnesium  (associated  with  carnallite)  have  the  potential  to 

reduce KCl recovery during the flotation process. 

 30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx  

Page A14 of A16 

.docx 

February, 2021 

 
 
 
 
 
SRK Consulting 

Criteria 
Environmental 
factors or 
assumptions 

JORC Code explanation 

Commentary 

Muga MRE Review – Technical Appendix A 

•  No environmental factors or other discipline were considered when reporting Mineral 

Resources or provided by Geoalcali as part of this study. 

reasonable  prospects 

•  Assumptions made regarding possible waste and process residue 
disposal options. It is always necessary as part of the process of 
determining 
for  eventual  economic 
extraction to consider the potential environmental impacts of the 
mining  and  processing  operation.  While  at  this  stage  the 
determination of potential environmental impacts, particularly for a 
greenfields project, may not always be well advanced, the status 
of  early  consideration  of  these  potential  environmental  impacts 
should  be  reported.  Where  these  aspects  have  not  been 
considered  this  should  be  reported  with  an  explanation  of  the 
environmental assumptions made. 

Bulk density 

•  Whether  assumed  or  determined.  If  assumed,  the  basis  for  the 
assumptions. If determined, the method used, whether wet or dry, 
the  frequency  of  the  measurements,  the  nature,  size  and 
representativeness of the samples. 

•  The bulk density for bulk material must have been measured by 
methods that adequately account for void spaces (vugs, porosity, 
etc.), moisture and differences between rock and alteration zones 
within the deposit. 

•  Discuss  assumptions  for  bulk  density  estimates  used  in  the 

evaluation process of the different materials. 

•  Density measurements were conducted on pieces of diamond core and cover all the major 
lithologies  at  Muga  throughout  the  2013-2019  drilling  campaigns  by  the  ALS  Sevilla 
Laboratory. 

•  Tonnages  are  estimated  using  variable  bulk  density  of  2.12  g/cm3 based  on  bulk  density 
measurements from core samples; in the case of PA, the seam with higher MgO content, a 
regression was applied to calculate the density as there was a strong relationship between 
density and MgO content in this seam. There is negligible water within the mineral structure 
in the potash which has no impact on the density. Measurements were made in July 2017 by 
the SGS Vostok Ltd. Testing Laboratory. 

 30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx  

Page A15 of A16 

.docx 

February, 2021 

 
 
 
 
 
SRK Consulting 

Criteria 
Classification 

JORC Code explanation 

•  The  basis  for  the  classification  of  the  Mineral  Resources  into 

varying confidence categories. 

•  Whether appropriate account has been taken of all relevant factors 
(i.e. relative confidence in tonnage/grade estimations, reliability of 
input data, confidence in continuity of geology and metal values, 
quality, quantity and distribution of the data). 

•  Whether the result appropriately reflects the Competent Person’s 

view of the deposit. 

Muga MRE Review – Technical Appendix A 

Commentary 
• 

Based on the definitions and guidelines presented in the JORC Code, SRK has assigned 
portions of the Mineral Resource into the Measured, Indicated and Inferred categories. 
In determining the appropriate classification criteria, several factors were considered: 

• 

JORC Code reporting requirements and guidelines; 

o 
o  Quality of data used in the estimation; 
o  Quantity and density of sample data; 
o  Geological knowledge  and understanding, focusing on geological and grade 

continuity; 

o  Quality of the geostatistics and interpolated block model; and 
o  Experience with other deposits of similar style. 

• 

The Mineral Resource classification appropriately reflects the CP’s view of the deposit. 

Audits or 
reviews 

•  The  results  of  any  audits  or  reviews  of  Mineral  Resource 

estimates. 

• 

• 

The mineral resource estimate was produced by Geoalcali under the supervision of Anna 
Fardell  of  SRK  Consulting.  The  final  parameters,  classification  and  block  model  was 
reviewed  according  to  SRK’s  internal  peer  review  process,  and  in  draft  form  by  the 
Company. 
No other external reviews have been completed to date. 

 30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx  

Page A16 of A16 

.docx 

February, 2021 

 
 
 
 
 
SRK Consulting 

Criteria 
Discussion of 
relative 
accuracy/ 
confidence 

JORC Code explanation 

•  Where  appropriate  a  statement  of  the  relative  accuracy  and 
confidence  level  in  the  Mineral  Resource  estimate  using  an 
approach  or  procedure  deemed  appropriate  by  the  Competent 
Person. For example, the application of statistical or geostatistical 
procedures to quantify the relative accuracy of the resource within 
stated  confidence  limits,  or,  if  such  an  approach  is  not  deemed 
appropriate, a qualitative discussion of the factors that could affect 
the relative accuracy and confidence of the estimate. 

•  The statement should specify whether it relates to global or local 
estimates, and, if local, state the relevant tonnages, which should 
be relevant to technical and economic evaluation. Documentation 
should include assumptions made and the procedures used. 
•  These  statements  of  relative  accuracy  and  confidence  of  the 
estimate  should  be  compared  with  production  data,  where 
available. 

Muga MRE Review – Technical Appendix A 

Commentary 
• 

The stated Mineral Resource is a combination of Measured, Indicated and Inferred Mineral 
Resources, generally reflecting the apparent grade continuity as well as geological continuity 
and sample spacing. 
There is a high level of confidence in the underlying drillhole data. 
There is a high level of confidence in the geological continuity of the mineralisation above 
the cut-off grade of 8% K2O. 
The  variography  has  characterised  the  spatial  correlation  between  grades  and  shows 
grades are correlated sufficiently. 
There  is  a  good  degree  of  confidence  in  the  accuracy  of  block  estimates,  which  were 
validated  using  several  methods  to  ensure  the  estimated  grade  provides  a  reasonable 
reflection of the underlying sample data. The block model has been validated on both a 
global and local scale. 
New drilling in the Vipasca Licence area has added new areas to the Mineral Resource. 
The Mineral Resource tonnage has increased by 14.91 Mt to 282.26 Mt and the grade of 
the Mineral Resource has decreased from 12.4% K2O to 11.8% K2O. The reasons for the 
decrease in grade and additional tonnage are the new drilling in the Vipasca Licence area 
has  added  new  areas  to  the  Mineral  Resource  with  lower  grade  than  previously  in  the 
Muga  Licence  area.  Besides  the  new  thickness  interpolation  has  decreased  the 
thicknesses  of  the  potash  horizons  at  the  edges  of  the  basin,  which  has  decreased  the 
tonnage in the Muga Licence area slightly, and the lower grade intercepts in Vipasca have 
influence the grades at the western edge of the Muga Licence which has decreased the 
block model grades at the western edge of that licence.  
The updated MRE is not materially different to that produced in 2018. Notwithstanding this 
the  work  has  improved  the  geological  understanding  of  this  area  of  the  deposit  and  the 
confidence in the Mineral Resource as a whole. 

• 
• 

• 

• 

• 
• 

• 

 30954 Muga Vipasca MRE Statement 2020 Final.docx  

Page A17 of A16 

.docx 

February, 2021 

 
 
 
 
 
 
u
a
.
m
o
c
.
s
e
c
r
u
o
s
e
r
d
e
fi
h
g
h

i

l