A lawsuit that reaches the center of the gold market
Two families are suing the London Bullion Market Association over the 2019 deaths of two 23-year-olds at North Mara in Tanzania, putting a relatively small standards-setter at the center of a legal fight with outsized stakes for a $1-trillion-a-week market. The court will consider whether the LBMA bears any responsibility because some of the mine's production went to a refiner on its Good Delivery List, the accreditation roster that underpins London's bullion trade.
According to Leigh Day, which represents the families, the LBMA portrays itself as the "global authority for precious metals" and acts in effect like a regulator. The firm argues the alleged abuses at the mine could have been avoided if the LBMA's rules were "properly and fearlessly applied."
The LBMA rejects that premise and says it will defend the claim. "LBMA disputes that it bears legal responsibility for these tragic deaths, and their profound human impact," the association 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."
What happened at North Mara and who is in the frame
The claimants assert that in July 2019 one 23-year-old died when police broke up a gathering of small-scale miners who had entered the site unlawfully, and that another 23-year-old was shot in the back while running from police in December 2019. The Tanzanian police did not respond to a request for comment.
Barrick Mining Corp., which owns a majority stake in North Mara, declined to comment. In a prior statement, the company said it was proud of its global human rights record and asserted the Tanzanian police operated independently of its direction or control. Earlier, Acacia Mining - in which Barrick held a majority stake before buying it outright in 2019 - along with its Tanzanian subsidiary was sued over alleged killings and injuries purportedly involving law enforcement and private security stationed at the mine. One UK lawsuit filed by Tanzanian villagers and handled by Leigh Day was resolved in 2015, with no admission of liability.
RAID, a corporate watchdog, issued several reports from 2014 onward alleging shootings, torture and severe beatings by Tanzanian police providing security at North Mara. Leigh Day contends the LBMA ought to have responded more forcefully once those allegations were in the public domain.
The claimants' lawyers say MMTC-PAMP India Pvt, a refiner on the Good Delivery List, continued processing North Mara material after some of those allegations became known. They maintain the LBMA should have suspended MMTC-PAMP - or at minimum warned of suspension if sourcing persisted - and that the possibility of being shut out from Good Delivery List refiners could have driven changes at the site and averted the two fatalities.
MMTC-PAMP said it strictly adheres to the LBMA responsible sourcing rules and undergoes annual audits conducted by an outside, independent auditor. The LBMA's position is that any culpability rests with the perpetrators, that it does not certify or run mines, that it has no personnel in Tanzania, and that oversight of police or mine guards is beyond its remit.
Gold's rulebook is written by a handful of bodies most investors have never heard of. Market Briefs explains who actually sets the rules, free every weekday.
Why this case could reshape gold's rulebook
London's role as the market's standards hub traces to 1750, when the Bank of England created the Good Delivery List to ensure consistent purity. The LBMA took over the list in 1987 and in recent years has expanded its scope by requiring accredited refiners to meet responsible-sourcing rules.
Insiders including traders, refiners and responsible-sourcing specialists say they mostly expect the LBMA to win, but they are not ruling out big repercussions for London and beyond. The Good Delivery List is relied upon by market participants and futures exchanges such as CME Group Inc., making accreditation close to essential for many major refiners.
The association's finances are modest relative to the market it oversees. Some of the world's biggest banks are members, but none is obligated to backstop it. According to its most recent accounts, reserves stood at roughly £1.4 million ($1.9 million) at the end of 2025, and it revealed exposure to £3 million in claimants' legal costs if it were to lose, excluding any damages.
People familiar with its thinking say a significant payout could leave the LBMA insolvent. As a contingency, there have been internal discussions about forming a successor body to keep core bullion market functions running, though no steps have been taken. Any replacement would need to pay to recover intellectual property that underpins the LBMA's operations, including its Good Delivery List.
People familiar with the organization's position say that if the court effectively holds the LBMA liable for wrongdoing at mines that feed accredited refiners, the Good Delivery system would cease to function. They add that the association lacks the capacity to oversee mines worldwide and might have to pull back from applying responsible-sourcing standards entirely if a sweeping duty of care were imposed. Leigh Day counters that it does not claim the system is unworkable, but that it was "rendered meaningless by conflicts of interest and negligence."
A decision that goes against the LBMA could likewise spur copycat litigation targeting other standards schemes, possibly extending to the London Metal Exchange, which mandates responsible-sourcing compliance for listed brands.
What this could mean for your money
This is not just inside baseball for bullion nerds. If the court resets the boundaries of how the Good Delivery List is policed, refiners that depend on that seal of approval and exchanges that reference it could face meaningful changes in how they operate.
The sector is split on the fix. Joanne Lebert, who leads the Canadian nonprofit IMPACT, cautions that replacing the LBMA "wouldn't necessarily solve the problem" and adds, "I think it might actually set us back." RAID's executive director Anneke Van Woudenberg is more blunt: "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," she said. "If a scheme like this can't be held to account when it gets it wrong, it's clear legislation will be required."
One more wrinkle: the LBMA's annual conference convenes this weekend in Sorrento, and the legal cloud will be hard to miss. Watch three things as the case unfolds: how the court defines the LBMA's duty of care, whether refiners on the list adjust their sourcing, and if the industry quietly builds a plan B in case the current system falters.
A market moving a trillion dollars a week now has its standards on trial. Get Market Briefs free and follow what happens next.
