Ithaca Energy Inc.

NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT APPROVAL

ITHACA ENERGY INC. now known as ITHACA ENERGY LIMITED

SECURITIES CLASS ACTION SECURITIES CLASS ACTION

READ THIS NOTICE CAREFULLY AS IT MAY AFFECT YOUR RIGHTS

This Notice is directed to all persons and entities, excluding certain persons associated with the Defendants, wherever they may reside or be domiciled, who purchased or otherwise acquired Ithaca Energy Inc., now known as Ithaca Energy Limited (“Ithaca”) common shares in the secondary market, on or after October 9, 2014, and held some or all of those securities until after the close of trading on February 24, 2015 (“Class Members” and the “Class”).

PURPOSE OF THIS NOTICE

A class action brought on behalf of Class Members has been settled. The Settlement has been approved by the Alberta Court of King’s Bench. This Notice provides Class Members with information about how to submit a Claim Form to the Administrator in order to participate in the distribution of the Net Settlement Amount.

THE ACTION

On May 26, 2015, a proposed class action was commenced on behalf of investors who purchased Ithaca common shares in the secondary market during the Class Period, against Ithaca in the Alberta Court of King’s Bench: Stevens v. Ithaca Energy Inc. (now, Ithaca Energy Limited) Court File no. 1501-05830 (the “Action“). The Plaintiff in the Action alleges that the Defendants made misrepresentations during the Class Period related to Ithaca’s offshore oil and gas business and operations concerning: (1) material modifications to its floating production facility, the FPF-1; and (2) corresponding 2015 pro forma production and revenue projections for the Greater Stella Area in the Central North Sea. Ithaca denies all such allegations.

The settlement of the Action, without an admission of liability on the part of the Defendant, was approved by The Honourable Justice Neufeld on August 7, 2025. This notice provides a summary of the settlement.

SUMMARY OF THE SETTLEMENT TERMS

Ithaca’s insurers will pay CAD $9 million (the “Settlement Amount”), in full and final settlement of all claims against Ithaca in the Action. Class Counsel Fees, including out-of-pocket expenses and taxes, were fixed by the Court as a first charge on the Settlement Amount in the amount of thirty (30) percent of CAD $9 million, plus disbursements, plus taxes. The settlement for the Class, less the Class Counsel Fees and disbursements, administrator’s expenses, and taxes, will be distributed to the Class in accordance with the Court-approved Plan of Allocation. The Settlement Agreement and Plan of Allocation may be viewed at https://bergermontague.ca/cases/ithaca-energy-inc/ and https://jssbarristers.ca/class-actions/ithaca-energy-inc/.

HOW TO MAKE A CLAIM FOR COMPENSATION:

CLAIMS FOR COMPENSATION MUST BE RECEIVED BY

Each Class Member must submit a completed Claim Form on or before January 5, 2026 in order to participate in the settlement. The Claim Form can be accessed or downloaded at

https://bergermontague.ca/cases/ithaca-energy-inc/ or obtained by calling the Administrator at 647.598.8772 ext 2. If you do not submit a completed Claim Form by January 5, 2026, you will not receive any part of the Net Settlement Amount.

The Court appointed Berger Montague (Canada) PC as the Administrator of the settlement to, among other things: (i) receive and process Claim Forms; (ii) decide eligibility for compensation; and (iii) distribute the net Settlement Amount to eligible Class Members. The Claim Form should be submitted to the Administrator by using the secure Online Claims System at  https://bergermontague.ca/cases/ithaca-energy-inc/ and https://jssbarristers.ca/class-actions/ithaca-energy-inc/. You may submit a paper Claim Form only if you do not have internet access. The paper Claim Form may be sent by mail or courier to:

Ithaca Administrator
330 Bay Street, Suite 505
Toronto, ON M5H 2S8
Email: [email protected]

QUESTIONS

Questions for the Class Members’ lawyers may be directed to:

Berger Montague (Canada) PC
330 Bay Street, Suite 505
Toronto, ON M5H 2S8
Tel: (647) 598-8772
Email: [email protected]

JSS Barristers
304 8 Ave SW #800,
Calgary, AB T2P 1C2
Tel:       403-571-0747
Email: [email protected]

INTERPRETATION

If there is a conflict between the provisions of this Notice and the Settlement Agreement, the terms of the Settlement Agreement will prevail.

This notice has been approved by the Court.  Questions about matters

in this notice should NOT be directed to the Court.
Background

This securities class action relates to the Defendants publishing core documents and making other statements containing misrepresentations about Ithaca’s offshore oil and gas business and operations concerning: (1) material modifications to its “FPF-1” Floating Production Facility; and (2) corresponding 2015 pro forma production and revenue projections for the Greater Stella Area. The representative plaintiff, on behalf of the class of shareholders, served his motion record in support of leave to proceed on December 1, 2015.

UPDATES

April 21, 2025. Upon the near conclusion of discovery, the parties have reached a settlement of the investor claim and pending approval from the Court. The hearing date is anticipated to be August 6 or 7, 2025. If the settlement agreement is approved by the Court and there are no objections from investors, we anticipate that the Claims Administration Process will commence during late September 2025.

June 24, 2019. The Court of King’s Bench of Alberta released its first decision relating to shareholders’ burden to seek “leave to proceed” with a statutory secondary market (a/k/a, open market purchase) claim against a responsible issuer.  The decision is identified as Stevens v. Ithaca Energy Inc., 2019 ABQB 474.

The investors argued that Ithaca Energy’s position directly violated the famous Supreme Court of Canada case of Kerr v. Daniel Leather Inc., 2007 SCC 44, at paragraphs 54 and 55, which was first followed in the context of a leave to proceed motion in Wong v. Pretium Resources Inc., 2017 ONSC 3361, at paragraphs 31 and 38.  Specifically, potential and the then current investors of Ithaca Energy should have been given all the then current material facts so they could make their own judgment about whether to accept or not management’s business judgment about the future outcome of the identified problems.

Equally as important for investors in providing a solid guidance as to what must be disclosed to investors, the Court of King’s Bench of Alberta also followed Sharbern Holdings Inc. v. Vancouver Airport Centre Ltd, 2011 SCC 23, in determining when an adverse fact rises to a level of becoming a material fact requiring disclosure to investors.  That definition can be summarized as asking whether that omitted adverse fact, if disclosed, would have significantly altered the total mix of information made available to investors at that time of the released quarterly report or news release.