Mr. Sam Ash reports

FEDERAL COURT HANDS BUNKER HILL MINING SIGNIFICANT SUMMARY JUDGMENT VICTORY OVER CRESCENT

The U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho has issued a memorandum decision and order delivering a significant summary judgment victory for the company on multiple key claims in the continuing litigation brought by Crescent Mine LLC against Bunker Hill. The court dismissed the core of the case that Crescent initiated in July, 2021, while also preserving Bunker Hill's primary claims against Crescent, keeping the company on the offensive.

"This decision puts Bunker Hill firmly on the offensive," said Sam Ash, president and chief executive officer of Bunker Hill. "The court dismissed Crescent's entire federal case, rejected its demand to force us to drain the mine and barred years of its remaining claims -- all while preserving our claim to make Crescent pay its fair share of water management costs. We are confident in our position as we press forward with our claims against Crescent."

Central to the decision, the court denied Crescent's attempt to dismiss Bunker Hill's CERCLA Section 113(f) contribution claim, holding that the claim remains viable and will proceed at trial. Through that claim, Bunker Hill seeks to hold Crescent financially accountable for its share of the costs of managing and remediating the contaminated water from the Bunker Hill and Crescent mines. With the claim preserved, Bunker Hill intends to diligently pursue a judgment for the dollar amount, requiring Crescent to pay its share of those costs.

At the same time, the court delivered a significant summary judgment against Crescent, granting the summary judgment motions of Bunker Hill and co-defendant Placer Mining Corp. and dismissing both of Crescent's federal CERCLA claims -- a cost-recovery claim under Section 107(a) and a declaratory-judgment claim under Section 113(g) -- in their entirety. These federal claims formed the centrepiece of Crescent's case against the company.

The court also rejected Crescent's attempt to force Bunker Hill to drain the mine, holding that any such remedial action falls within the exclusive authority of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), rather than the courts, and granted Bunker Hill and Placer summary judgment on that issue. Notably, the company continues to work with the EPA to manage contaminated mine waters pursuant to an established agreement between the company and the EPA.

The court further granted Bunker Hill summary judgment dismissing substantial portions of Crescent's state-law tort claims for trespass, nuisance and negligence, holding that any damages claimed for alleged nuisance or negligence occurring before August, 2017, or alleged trespass occurring before August, 2018, are barred by the applicable statutes of limitations. The court also denied Crescent's own motion for summary judgment in nearly all respects, rejecting Crescent's bid to establish liability against the company. A narrow set of Crescent's state-law claims, limited to alleged damages within a roughly three-year window, remains to be resolved at trial.

The ruling does not affect Bunker Hill's continuing mine restart activities or operations, which, as previously announced, remain on track to produce the first batch of concentrate for sale by the end of this month.

About Bunker Hill Mining Corp.

Bunker Hill Mining is a U.S.-based exploration and development company focused on the restart of its flagship asset -- the historic Bunker Hill mine in northern Idaho's prolific Silver Valley. This renowned silver, zinc and lead deposit is being advanced using modern exploration techniques and responsible development practices to unlock its full potential.

The company's strategy is centred on efficiently revitalizing this high-quality asset to deliver long-term value while upholding strong environmental and operational standards. Bunker Hill is committed to maximizing shareholder returns through the disciplined redevelopment of one of North America's most storied mining operations.

We seek Safe Harbor.