What the claim says
Two families are taking the LBMA to court in London over the deaths of two 23-year-old men at the North Mara mine in Tanzania in July and December 2019. Leigh Day, the law firm bringing the case, says the association holds itself out as the "global authority for precious metals" and behaves like a quasi-regulator. The firm argues that abuses could have been prevented if LBMA rules were "properly and fearlessly applied."
The claim recounts that in July 2019, one of the men died from a gunshot when officers broke up a gathering of small-scale trespassers at the site. The other was allegedly shot in the back while fleeing police in December 2019. "The claimants do not contend that the LBMA's system is unworkable," Leigh Day said. Instead, they argue the system was "rendered meaningless by conflicts of interest and negligence."
RAID, a corporate watchdog, issued reports from 2014 onward alleging shootings, torture and severe beatings by Tanzanian police who provided security at North Mara. The claimants say the LBMA should have acted once those reports surfaced, including suspending or threatening to suspend MMTC-PAMP India Pvt from the Good Delivery List if it continued sourcing from the mine. They contend that warning of a cutoff from accredited refiners could have prompted reforms at the mine and averted the fatalities. "At the moment these industry certification schemes are weak, can't be trusted, and far too often put a clean label on tainted commodities, in this case tainted gold," said Anneke Van Woudenberg, who serves as RAID's executive director. "If a scheme like this can't be held to account when it gets it wrong, it's clear legislation will be required."
LBMA's role and its defense
London's place as gold's standards hub goes back to 1750, when the Bank of England created the Good Delivery List to guarantee consistent bar quality. The LBMA took charge of the list in 1987 and in recent years began requiring refiners to follow responsible-sourcing rules. This lawsuit will determine if the association bears partial liability given that some North Mara production went to a refiner on that list.
The LBMA says the lawsuit has no merit. "LBMA disputes that it bears legal responsibility for these tragic deaths, and their profound human impact," the group said. "The claim misconstrues LBMA's role in the supply chain, and we deny that LBMA owed the duty of care alleged in these proceedings." The association's defense is that responsibility for any violence lies with its perpetrators, emphasizing that it does not certify or oversee mines, employs no staff in Tanzania, and is not in a position to supervise the actions of police or mine security.
MMTC-PAMP said it rigorously follows LBMA responsible-sourcing rules and is audited annually by an independent third party. North Mara's majority owner, Barrick Mining Corp., offered no comment. In an earlier statement, Barrick said it is proud of its human rights record and stated that it neither directed nor controlled the Tanzanian police.
Even amid unsettling headlines, steady habits build wealth over time, so get the free Always Be Buying E-Book
The Tanzanian police did not respond to a request for comment. Before Barrick completed a full takeover in 2019, it already held a majority stake in Acacia Mining, and lawsuits alleging killings and injuries at the location had previously targeted Acacia and its Tanzanian operating subsidiary. In 2015, a lawsuit in the UK, filed by Tanzanian villagers and handled by Leigh Day, concluded with no admission of liability.
The stakes for the gold market
The LBMA sets the standards for a London market that turns over about $1 trillion each week, and the courtroom fight arrives just as traders and executives head to Sorrento for the group's annual conference. In private conversations with Bloomberg, several traders, refiners and responsible-sourcing specialists said they expect the LBMA to win, while acknowledging the possibility of a judgment that rattles the London gold market and beyond.
People familiar with the LBMA's thinking say a big payout could push the association into insolvency. As a contingency, there have been internal talks about creating a successor body to keep essential market functions going if needed, though no steps have been taken. Any replacement would also need to pay to recover the intellectual property behind critical market plumbing, including the Good Delivery List.
Insiders warn that if the court finds the LBMA bears responsibility for mistreatment at mines that feed accredited refiners, the Good Delivery system would effectively break down. The association does not have the resources to monitor mines globally, and a broad duty of care could force it to pull back from enforcing responsible-sourcing rules entirely. A loss could also invite similar claims against other standards-setters such as the London Metal Exchange. The Good Delivery List is relied on by market participants and venues like CME Group Inc., making accreditation close to essential for many top refiners.
The money angle
The LBMA's finances are modest for the scale of market it helps govern. According to its most recent filings, reserves totaled about £1.4 million ($1.9 million) at the end of 2025. They also show that, in the event of a loss, the association might be liable for £3 million toward the claimants' legal expenses, in addition to any damages awarded to the families. Despite big banks among its members, none are required to backstop it financially.
Swapping in a new watchdog will not magically fix supply chains. According to Joanne Lebert, who leads the Canadian nonprofit IMPACT as executive director, "I think it might actually set us back," adding that replacing the LBMA "wouldn't necessarily solve the problem" of ensuring responsibly sourced gold.
When stories focus on accountability, remember consistent investing matters; download our complimentary Always Be Buying E-Book today
