IN THE MATTER OF THE SECURITIES ACT

R.S.O. 1990, c.S.5, as amended

O.S.C.AND

YBM MAGNEX INTERNATIONAL INC.

HARRY W. ANTES

JACOB G. BOGATIN

KENNETH E. DAVIES

IGOR FISHERMAN

DANIEL E. GATTI

FRANK S. GREENWALD

R. OWEN MITCHELL

DAVID R. PETERSON

MICHAEL D. SCHMIDT

LAWRENCE D. WILDER

GRIFFITHS MCBURNEY & PARTNERS

NATIONAL BANK FINANCIAL CORPORATION

(formerly known as First Marathon Securities Limited)

STATEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS OF STAFF OF THE ONTARIO SECURITIES

COMMISSION

Staff of the Ontario Securities Commission (the "Commission") make

the following allegations:

I. The Respondents

1. YBM Magnex International Inc. ("YBM" or the "Company") was

incorporated on March 16, 1994, in Alberta, Canada as Pratecs

Technologies Inc. On October 5, 1995 the Company changed its name to

YBM. YBM became a reporting issuer in Ontario on January 22, 1996.

YBM shares were listed and posted for trading on The Toronto Stock

Exchange on March 7, 1996. On May 13, 1998 the Commission issued a

temporary cease trade order in respect of YBM shares, which order

remains in effect. On December 8, 1998, pursuant to an order of the

Court of Queens Bench of Alberta, a Receiver was appointed

respecting the present and future assets, property and undertaking

of YBM.

2. During the period May 1, 1996 to May 13, 1998 (the "material

time"), there were eight members of the YBM Board of Directors (the

"Directors"), two of whom were officers of the Company. The

remaining six directors were not officers of YBM. The Directors

were:

a) Harry W. Antes ("Antes"), Chairman of the Board of YBM and a

member of the YBM Audit Committee; appointed director on April 29,

1996; a retired Vice President of a technology company;

b) Jacob G. Bogatin ("Bogatin"), President and Chief Executive

Officer of YBM; appointed director on April 4, 1994;

c) Kenneth Davies ("Davies"), appointed director on April 4, 1994; a

principal of a mineral exploration company;

d) Igor Fisherman ("Fisherman"), Chief Operating Officer of YBM;

appointed director on April 29, 1996;

e) Frank S. Greenwald ("Greenwald"), a member of the YBM Audit

Committee; appointed director on April 29, 1996; a retired Vice

President of an engineering company;

f) R. Owen Mitchell ("Mitchell"), a member of the YBM Audit

Committee; appointed director on January 26, 1996; a Vice President

and Director of First Marathon Securities Limited (now known as

National Bank Financial Corporation),

g) David R. Peterson ("Peterson"), appointed director on April 29,

1996; a partner with a Toronto-based law firm; and

h) Michael D. Schmidt ("Schmidt"), appointed director on April 4,

1994; an independent businessman.

3. Daniel E. Gatti ("Gatti") was the Vice President of Finance and

Chief Financial Officer of YBM during the material time, appointed

an officer on January 26, 1996.

4. Lawrence D. Wilder ("Wilder") is a partner with the law firm

Cassels Brock and Blackwell which was the Canadian general counsel

to YBM during the material time. Wilder had primary responsibility

for the YBM engagement which commenced on or about September 1995

and ended on August 19, 1998.

5. On or about May 6, 1997, YBM entered into an agreement with two

Canadian securities dealers to act as co-lead underwriters (the

"Co-Lead Underwriters") for a financing being contemplated at that

time by YBM. The Co-Lead Underwriters, and the percentage of the YBM

offering each was ultimately obligated to purchase, were:

a) National Bank Financial Corp., known during the material time as

First Marathon Securities Limited ("FMSL") which during the material

time was, and continues to be, registered under the Securities Act

as a Broker and Investment Dealer (35%); and

b) Griffiths McBurney & Partners ("GMP") which during the material

time was, and continues to be, registered under the Securities Act

as a Broker and Investment Dealer (35%).

6. In addition to FMSL and GMP, there were three "junior" members of

the underwriting syndicate for YBM's 1997 public offering, which in

accordance with the terms of an Underwriting Agreement dated

November 17, 1997 were obligated to purchase the remaining 30% of

the YBM offering.

7. During the material time when Mitchell acted as a Director of

YBM, he was also the principal representative of FMSL in the

underwriting syndicate.

II. Overview of Staff's Allegations

8. There are six specific allegations being advanced by Staff of the

Ontario Securities Commission ("Staff"), which may be summarized as

follows:

a) that YBM filed a preliminary prospectus dated May 30, 1997, and a

final prospectus dated November 17, 1997, that failed to contain

full, true, and plain disclosure of all material facts relating to

the securities offered; specifically, material facts respecting the

mandate, information obtained by and findings of the Special

(Independent) Committee created by the YBM Board of Directors on

August 29, 1996;

b) that the Directors, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial

Officer of YBM authorized, permitted or acquiesced in YBM filing a

preliminary prospectus dated May 30, 1997 and a final prospectus

dated November 17, 1997 that failed to contain full, true and plain

disclosure of all material facts relating to the securities offered;

specifically, material facts respecting the mandate, information

obtained by and findings of the Special (Independent) Committee

created by the YBM Board of Directors on August 29, 1996;

c) that the Co-Lead Underwriters signed a certificate to a

preliminary prospectus dated May 30, 1997 and a final prospectus

dated November 17, 1997 which prospectuses, to the best of their

knowledge, did not contain full, true and plain disclosure of all

material facts relating to the securities offered; specifically,

material facts respecting the mandate, information obtained by and

findings of the Special (Independent) Committee created by the YBM

Board of Directors on August 29, 1996;

d) that YBM failed to comply with its continuous disclosure

obligations by not issuing a news release forthwith disclosing the

nature and substance of a material change in the affairs of YBM;

specifically, that the auditor for YBM, Deloitte & Touche LLP (U.S.)

("D&T"), had advised YBM by no later than April 20, 1998 that it

would not perform any further services for YBM, including the

rendering of an audit opinion in respect of YBM's 1997 annual

financial statements, until YBM had completed an in-depth forensic

investigation addressing specific concerns to the satisfaction of

D&T;

e) that the members of the YBM Audit Committee (Antes, Greenwald and

Mitchell), the Chief Executive Officer (Bogatin), the Chief

Financial Officer (Gatti) and the Chief Operating Officer

(Fisherman) of YBM authorized, permitted or acquiesced in YBM

failing to comply with its continuous disclosure obligations by not

issuing a news release forthwith disclosing the nature and substance

of a material change in the affairs of YBM; specifically, that the

auditor for YBM, D&T, had advised YBM by no later than April 20,

1998 that it would not perform any further services for YBM,

including the rendering of an audit opinion in respect of YBM's 1997

annual financial statements, until YBM had completed an in-depth

forensic investigation addressing specific concerns to the

satisfaction of D&T; and

f) that Wilder made statements to Staff of the Commission during the

course of Staff's review of YBM's preliminary prospectus that, in a

material respect and at the time and in the light of the

circumstances under which the statements were made, were misleading

or untrue or did not state a fact that was required to be stated or

that was necessary to make the statements not misleading;

specifically, statements contained in a letter from Wilder to Staff

dated July 4, 1997 concerning the results of due diligence conducted

in respect of YBM.

III. YBM's Corporate Structure During the Material Time

9. Although YBM was a Canadian company during the material time, as

of May 1, 1997 it had no Canadian operations. YBM's head office was

located in the United States, the location of its wholly-owned

subsidiary YBM Magnex Inc ("YBM Inc."). YBM Inc. controlled 100% of

the "ordinary" shares of Arigon Company Ltd. ("Arigon"), an

Alderney, Channel Islands company, with offices in Budapest,

Hungary. YBM Inc. also controlled 100% of the "ordinary" shares of

United Trade Limited ("UTL"), a Cayman Islands company. On or about

April 1, 1996, Arigon assigned its assets and business to UTL, also

with offices in Budapest, Hungary. The assets and business assigned

to UTL included approximately 99.9% of the shares of Magnex RT

("RT"), a Hungarian corporation also located in Budapest, Hungary.

On April 1, 1996 YBM divested itself of another subsidiary, Arbat

International, Inc. ("Arbat"), a Russian trading company. On or

about August 22, 1997, YBM completed the acquisition of Crumax

Magnetics, a magnet manufacturer located in the United States.

10. According to YBM's public disclosure as of May 1, 1997, YBM was

a manufacturer and distributor of magnets. YBM also bought and sold

oil. YBM's magnet manufacturing process was conducted by RT which

owned manufacturing facilities in Budapest, Hungary. Pursuant to

agreements entered into between RT and Arigon in September 1992,

Arigon transferred to RT machinery and equipment necessary for the

manufacture of magnets. Arigon also became responsible for securing

all applicable clearances for production purchases and delivery of

materials and supplies to RT. Arigon also became responsible for

arranging for the marketing, sale and distribution of the products

manufactured by RT as well as the marketing, sale and distribution

of products manufactured by others. Arigon was also responsible for

the purchase and sale of oil. On or about April 1, 1996, these

responsibilities were assumed by UTL. Fisherman, who was the

President of Arigon, and other officers and directors of Arigon,

resigned their positions at Arigon and assumed the same appointments

with UTL.

11. On April 29, 1996, the newly constituted Board of Directors of

YBM (elected by the YBM shareholders at the annual meeting held

earlier that day) held a meeting attended by all of the Directors

and YBM's Canadian general counsel. During the meeting the Directors

discussed the reasoning for the divestiture of Arbat and the

relocation of Arigon. The minutes of the meeting record the

following:

The Chairman [Bogatin] updated the board as to various other matters

including the Company's plans to sell Arbat International Inc. to a

group of arm's length purchasers for consideration equal to

approximately (US) $250,000. The Chairman indicated that the

rationale for the sales [sic] was that the Company's operations in

Eastern Europe were difficult to supervise and exposed it to certain

potential liability. The Chairman confirmed that Arbat will continue

to render services to the Company but only on a contractual basis.

The Chairman also advised the board of a proposal to relocate the

Company's wholly-owned subsidiary, Arigon Co. Ltd. from the Channel

Islands U.K. to the Cayman Islands. The Chairman explained that the

rationale for such move was to bring Arigon's operations closer to

the Company's North American headquarters. The Chairman advised that

the Royal Bank of Canada was assisting the Company and Arigon in

this move. The Chairman also advised that upon completion of such

move, Arigon's name will most likely be changed to United Trade

Limited. The Chairman advised that this move would be accomplished

by way of a tax free reorganization of assets.

IV. The Alleged Failure to Make Full, True and Plain Disclosure of

All Material Facts

i) What Was Disclosed by YBM?

12. On May 30, 1997 YBM filed a short-form preliminary prospectus

with the Commission.

13. The preliminary prospectus contained a Certificate which was

signed by Bogatin and Gatti in their capacity as CEO and CFO

respectively, and by Antes and Peterson on behalf of the Board of

Directors. The Certificate stated that:

The foregoing together with documents incorporated herein by

reference, constitutes full, true and plain disclosure of all

material facts relating to the securities offered by this prospectus

as required by the securities laws of the provinces of...Ontario...

14. The preliminary prospectus also contained a Certificate signed

by each of the underwriters (including the Co-Lead Underwriters)

stating that:

To the best of our knowledge, information and belief, the foregoing,

together with the documents incorporated herein by reference,

constitutes full, true and plain disclosure of all material facts

relating to the securities offered by this short form prospectus as

required by the securities laws of the provinces of...Ontario...

15. YBM's Annual Information Form, dated May 1, 1997 ("AIF"), was

incorporated by reference in the preliminary prospectus. The AIF

stated, in part, under the heading "Business Risks, Risks Associated

with Activities in Eastern Europe", that:

The Company's manufacturing operations are located in Hungary.

Additionally, 47% of consolidated net sales are concentrated in

Eastern Europe. Economic, political and general business conditions

in these regions are highly inflationary and are potentially

unstable.

The evolving market economies in Eastern Europe are characterized by

a high level of cash transactions as well as less rigorous financial

controls. The Company has and continues to implement recommendations

made by independent public accountants and others with expertise in

these regions to improve the Company's operations in these regions.

Over the last two years the Company became aware of concerns that

had been expressed in the media and by government authorities

generally concerning companies doing business in Eastern Europe and,

particularly, in Russia. To this end, the Company has taken a number

of steps to address these concerns, including:

1. The divestiture in the first quarter of 1996 of Arbat

International Inc. ("Arbat"), the Company's Russian trading company

which distributed a variety of consumer goods and materials through

Eastern Europe and Russia. Upon a review of Arbat's operations,

management was not satisfied that adequate customer and sales

representative acceptance procedures could be implemented, including

monitoring the propriety of sales commissions paid to sales

representatives; and

2. the establishment of an independent committee of the Board of

Directors who retained experts knowledgeable with political, social

and economic issues in Eastern Europe to review the Company's

operations to ensure that they are consistent with the standards

applicable to Canadian public companies. Recommendations resulting

from such review are being implemented by the Company. The Board of

Directors, through the Audit Committee, will monitor ongoing

compliance by the Company with such recommendations.

16. On June 3, 1997 a meeting was held between Staff responsible for

the review of the preliminary prospectus, Canadian general counsel

for YBM, counsel for the underwriters (Fogler, Rubinoff) and senior

officers of the Co-Lead Underwriters. The purpose of the meeting was

to discuss the time frame for Staff's review of the preliminary

prospectus. During the course of the meeting Staff was informed that

YBM had hired The Fairfax Group, a firm located in the United

States, to look into rumours and innuendo surrounding the Company.

Staff was informed at this meeting that Fairfax could not find any

evidence to substantiate the rumours. Staff was also informed that

YBM's Canadian general counsel did not look into whether the

authorities in the United States had any concerns with the Company,

but understood that the United States Justice Department approved

the Crucible [Crumax Magnetics] transaction which gave Canadian

general counsel comfort.

17. Staff issued its first comment letter in respect of the

preliminary prospectus on June 16, 1997. Among the comments made by

Staff in respect of the AIF was the following:

On page 6, under the heading "Risks Associated with Activities in

Eastern Europe", reference is made to new standards for business

practices being implemented by the Board. Please describe the

circumstances respecting the review [by the Independent Committee of

the Board of Directors referred to in the AIF] of the Company's

operations. What recommendations are being implemented? Describe the

"standards applicable to Canadian companies". [emphasis added]

18. On June 18, 1997 YBM, through their Canadian general counsel, in

a letter copied to counsel for the underwriters, responded to

Staff's first comment letter and, in connection with Staff's request

for information in respect of the "Circumstances Surrounding the

Review of the Company's Operations", stated as follows:

Over the past year, the Company has had some difficulty in being

issued certain business visas for employees. As a result, the

Company decided to investigate this further in order to resolve the

problem. The Company's efforts confirmed that U.S. law enforcement

agencies had placed a priority on uncovering infiltration of

organized crime from the former Soviet Union into U.S. businesses.

Given the roots of the Company and its affiliates in Russia, and the

involvement of former Russian nationals as shareholders and managers

of the Company, the Company believes that it may have been examined

as part of any such investigation. The visas which prompted the

concerns were subsequently issued by the U.S. Government without

comment.

As noted in the AIF, the Company took a number of steps to address

any possible concerns, including the divestiture in the first

quarter of 1996 of Arbat International Inc., the Company's Russian

trading company, and the establishment of a special committee of the

board to review the operations of the Company in Eastern Europe.

Special Committee Recommendations

The Special Committee made the following recommendations which have

been or are being implemented by the Company's management:

- Establishment of improved cash controls at the Company's Hungarian

facilities;

- Establishment of more detailed customer and agent approval

criteria;

- Establishment of a more accurate data base on these customers and

agents;

- Establishment of new management information systems; and

- Consolidation of accounting control at the Company's Newtown,

Pennsylvania, head office through establishment of integrated

information systems at each site of the Company's operations.

Standards Applicable to Canadian Companies

The reference in the AIF to "standards applicable to Canadian

companies" refers to internal controls and financial reporting

requirements normally found in diversified Canadian public

companies. [emphasis added]

19. On June 24, 1997 Staff requested that YBM undertake an

independent audit of YBM's income statement for the year ended

December 31, 1996 and requested that the assignment be performed by

a "Big Six" accounting firm. In response to Staff's proposal, by

letter dated July 4, 1997, Wilder informed Staff as follows:

As discussed above, the Confirming Accountant will be in a position

to deliver its report to you no later than Tuesday, July 8, 1997.

Based upon the results reported to date, we believe that the report

will represent a continuation of the series of favourable due

diligence results pertaining to the business of YBM conducted by

independent parties. This stands in stark contrast to the rumors and

innuendo to which YBM has been subject and which , based upon the

information provided to us to date, have not been subject to any

outside scrutiny or independent verification whatsoever.

As discussed previously, the Company, its advisors, as well as the

underwriters and their advisors have made every effort to address

each concern raised to date in order to complete this financing and

allow the Company to complete its acquisition transaction which is

crucial to its continued success. Needless to say, YBM's inability

to proceed with this financing despite the efforts of all the

parties concerned and referenced herein would have serious and

lasting negative consequences to the Company and its shareholders.

We respectfully submit that such an occurrence would not be in the

public interest in view of the extensive due diligence completed to

date and the uniformly positive results thereof. [emphasis added]

20. On October 13, 1997 D&T issued an unqualified audit opinion in

respect of YBM's financial statements as of December 31, 1996. The

audited financial statements formed part of a material change report

issued by YBM dated November 13, 1997.

21. On November 17, 1997 Bogatin and Gatti, in their capacity as CEO

and CFO respectively, and Antes and Peterson, on behalf of the Board

of Directors, signed the Certificate to YBM's final prospectus

representing that the prospectus, together with the documents

incorporated by reference therein, constituted full, true and plain

disclosure of all material facts. Each of the underwriters

(including the Co-Lead Underwriters) signed a Certificate

representing that, to the best of their knowledge, information and

belief, the prospectus and the documents incorporated by reference

therein, constituted full true and plain disclosure of all material

facts.

22. On November 20, 1997 YBM received a receipt for the final

short-form prospectus dated November 17, 1997. Pursuant to the final

prospectus YBM distributed 3.2 million common shares for gross

proceeds of $52.8 million. In addition, the final prospectus

qualified the distribution of an additional 4 million common shares

issuable upon the conversion of $48 million of secured convertible

notes which YBM had previously distributed, on a prospectus-exempt

basis, on or about August 21, 1997. The underwriters' fee, exclusive

of any over-allotment option, was $2,376,000. In addition,

subsequent to the closing of the public offering, YBM paid to FMSL

and GMP $600,000 each for advisory services rendered in connection

with the $48 million private placement noted above.

23. The final prospectus continued to incorporate by reference YBM's

AIF. Also incorporated by reference was the November 13, 1997

material change report. In respect of the review of the Company's

operations conducted by the independent committee of the YBM Board

of Directors and experts retained by it, as referred to in the AIF,

the only additional disclosure contained within the final

prospectus, or any document incorporated by reference therein, was

the following, as stated in the final prospectus:

In order to address the special risks inherent in carrying on

business in Hungary in particular and Eastern Europe in general,

YBM:

(a) has established improved cash controls at its Hungarian

facilities;

(b) has developed more detailed end user and distributor approval

criteria;

respecting its distributors and end users;

(d) is in the process of implementing new management information

systems; and

(e) is in the process of improving and centralizing controls over

all of its international accounting activities at its Newtown,

Pennsylvania head office.

The intent of the foregoing initiatives is to ensure that despite

the fact that YBM carries on a substantial portion of its activities

in Eastern Europe, its internal controls and financial reporting

standards will be in accordance with those otherwise generally

applicable to Canadian public companies...

ii) What Was Not Disclosed?

24. On August 15, 1996 the Board of Directors of YBM held a meeting

at the YBM offices in Newtown, Pennsylvania. All of the Directors

were in attendance along with Gatti, Wilder, and YBM counsel from

the United States ("U.S. Counsel"). According to the minutes of the

August 15, 1996 meeting, the following was discussed:

Jacob Bogatin and Daniel Gatti discussed the largely publicized

interest of the United States government in companies doing business

in Eastern Europe. They indicated that it is likely that the United

States government has an interest in YBM because of the degree of

scrutiny employees receive traveling to and from YBM's Hungarian

operations and because of comments made to management in pursuing

reasons for such delays. In addition, YBM Magnex has sponsored a

number of employees (Hungarian and Russian nationals) in obtaining

visas and has assisted many of them with US Immigration Laws. They

informed the board that management in the past six months, had tried

to establish closer ties to U.S. embassys [sic] abroad. They also

indicated that the U.S. government, probably as a matter of policy,

looks at any company with ties to Eastern Europe. Management does

not believe such interest will be alleviated until the market

economies in Eastern Europe are fully developed and business

relationships between the East and West become routine. [emphasis

added]

25. Among the "comments made to management in pursuing reasons for

such delays" were comments made by U.S. Counsel for YBM to Bogatin

on August 2, 1996. U.S. Counsel reported on inquiries made of the

United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania,

stating as follows:

Peter called the U.S. Attorney and requested a meeting and offered

the Company's full cooperation. The U.S. Attorney returned Peter's

call and said he could not meet with us [YBM]. He confirmed that the

Department of Justice was conducting a "highly sensitive" criminal

investigation of YBM Magnex and that it would be inappropriate to

meet with us. He told Peter that nothing we could offer would be

appropriate at this time. He said he could not discuss the nature of

the investigation because it is "especially sensitive".

In view of the fact that, for the first time, we have a confirmation

that YBM Magnex is the target of a federal criminal investigation,

we must advise that this information be immediately made known to

the Board of Directors. Peter and I are willing to meet with your

Board and make a full report, if you believe it would be helpful.

The Board may wish to consider undertaking a full internal

investigation, although we have previously discussed the

difficulties of investigating when we are unaware of the nature of

the specific allegations against the Company.

I believe we have exhausted our efforts to obtain information about

the nature of the concerns that the federal government has about YBM

Magnex. We have no idea how long this cloud may continue to linger

over the Company. We do know, however, that the situation is

serious. [emphasis added]

26. On August 29, 1996 a Special Meeting of the YBM Board of

Directors was held in Toronto. Minutes of this meeting have not been

identified. Attending this meeting were: Antes, Davies, Greenwald,

Mitchell, Peterson, Wilder and U.S. Counsel for YBM. The Board

concluded that a Special (Independent) Committee should be formed to

investigate the situation. It was further decided that no further

discussions would be held or attempted with U.S. authorities until

the Special Committee provided a final report. Members of the Board

appointed to the Special Committee were Mitchell (Chair), Davies and

Schmidt.

27. On November 1, 1996 the Board of Directors held a meeting via

conference call. No minutes or notes of this meeting have been

identified. However, the Special Committee prepared an Interim

Report entitled "Report of the Special Committee to the Board of

Directors" (the "Interim Report") on or about November 1, 1996. The

Interim Report included the following comments:

In August 1996, the management of [YBM] were made aware of a pending

investigation of the Company and its activities through the U.S.

Attorney's office in Philadelphia. The focus of the investigation

was not disclosed, however, discussions with counsel confirmed that

U.S. law enforcement agencies had placed a priority on uncovering

infiltration of Organized Crime from the Former Soviet Union into

U.S. business. Given the roots of YBM and its affiliates in Russia

and the involvement of former Russian nationals as shareholders and

managers of the Company it was viewed to be a reasonable expectation

that this would be the basis of such investigation.

28. The Interim Report described the mandate of the Special

Committee as being to "independently investigate possible areas of

concern" and to "report back to the Board on findings and

recommended further actions". The Interim Report also indicated that

the Special Committee "was given clear authority to undertake any

independent actions or investigations which it felt were

appropriate". Among the further actions proposed by the Special

Committee was to engage a "professional East European investigator

to provide [the Special Committee] with a background dossier on

certain individuals who were original shareholders of YBM and/or who

have acted as commissioned salespeople receiving material

compensation from the Company".

29. On or about November 8, 1996, at the recommendation of Peterson,

YBM retained the services of an independent company, The Fairfax

Group, Ltd. ("Fairfax"). Fairfax, now known as Decision

Strategies/Fairfax International LLC, is an international

investigative and security firm that conducts corporate

investigations. The Fairfax officials responsible for the YBM

investigation consisted of three senior officials: a lawyer who was

a former Special Prosecutor; a forensic accountant; and a retired

U.S. Ambassador and former senior official with the U.S. State

Department. A Retainer Agreement was entered into on or about

November 14, 1996 signed on behalf of YBM by Mitchell. Fairfax's

initial assignment was to "assist the client by undertaking a due

diligence and internal investigation of YBN [sic] Magnex,

International located in Philadelphia and Hungary".

30. In conducting its investigation, Fairfax performed extensive

background checks on various persons and companies associated with

YBM relying on various data bases and a network of sources located

throughout the world. They also attended at offices of YBM and its

subsidiaries in Philadelphia and Budapest, spoke with members of

senior management, reviewed company records and met with some of the

original shareholders of YBM. In the period December 1996 to March

21, 1997 Fairfax regularly briefed Mitchell on the status of its

investigation, including an extensive briefing on March 3, 1997 at a

meeting in Chapel Hill, North Carolina during which Mitchell

informed Fairfax that he would write a report reflecting the

information provided by Fairfax.

31. On March 21, 1997 Fairfax reported orally on the results of its

investigation to date at a meeting in Toronto. Participating in this

meeting on behalf of YBM were Mitchell and Wilder in person, and

Antes and Schmidt via telephone. At the conclusion of Fairfax's

presentation, Mitchell requested Fairfax to make the same

presentation at a meeting in Philadelphia the following day.

Participating in the March 22, 1997 meeting on behalf of YBM were

Mitchell, Antes, Bogatin, Gatti, Wilder and YBM's U.S. Counsel.

32. Among the information conveyed by Fairfax during the meetings on

March 21 and 22, 1997 was the following:

a) that reliable Fairfax sources in several agencies of the United

States Government had indicated that the visa problems being

experienced by YBM personnel were due to issues involving national

security and organized crime;

b) that the original shareholders of YBM were confirmed as being

members of the same Russian organized crime syndicate (the

"Organization"), with interests in Europe (East and West), the

Middle East and North America;

c) that among the companies which reliable sources had identified as

being owned or controlled by the Organization were Arbat in Russia,

Arigon in the United Kingdom and "Magnek" in Hungary;

d) that a review of YBM records had revealed that sales commissions

in excess of $2.5 million had been paid by Arigon to a principal

leader of the Organization and his chief assistant in the years 1993

to 1996;

e) that the equipment sold by the original shareholders to RT for

approximately $14 million may have been overvalued, the equipment

having been purchased for one-tenth of the value recorded on the

books of RT, and that the records documenting this transaction may

be false;

f) that the sale of Arbat on or about April 1, 1996 for $250,000 (of

which only $150,000 was received by YBM) was to two persons who were

identified as being members of the Organization and as having

received sales commissions from Arigon/UTL in 1996 totaling in

excess of $150,000;

g) that UTL was using a bank account, in the name of a company which

was not part of YBM's publicly disclosed corporate structure, as its

main operating account; that transactions involving millions of

dollars went through the account; and that this account was

controlled by one of the YBM original shareholders who was neither

an officer nor an employee of UTL;

h) that there were indications that certain books and records had

been falsified;

i) that in the opinion of Fairfax all of the "ingredients" were

present for YBM to be used for money laundering activities; and

j) that in respect of companies with which YBM was doing business,

some of these companies were shells, others were shells within

shells, others did not exist, and still others were owned by persons

who had received sales commissions from Arigon/UTL.

33. At both the March 21 and 22, 1997 meetings, Fairfax made it

clear that in their view the key issue confronting YBM was that

there were a number of organized crime figures involved in the

operations in Hungary and that this was a serious problem. Fairfax

made a number of recommendations for YBM's consideration.

34. On April 9, 1997 Mitchell sent to Fairfax for their review and

comment a document, drafted by Mitchell and Wilder, entitled "Report

of the Special Committee to the Board of Directors YBM Magnex

International Inc. April 2, 1997". Fairfax had significant

reservations respecting the contents of this document which included

a section entitled "Results of the Fairfax Review". Fairfax provided

their comments to Mitchell in a telephone conference call on April

10, 1997. Fairfax informed Mitchell that the report was inaccurate

and that it did not reflect Fairfax's findings and the information

which had been conveyed to Mitchell. Subsequently, Fairfax did not

receive any further information as to what, if anything, Mitchell

may have reported to the YBM Board of Directors.

35. On April 13, 1997 at the request of YBM, Fairfax attended a

meeting in Philadelphia. Bogatin, Gatti and Mitchell attended this

meeting on behalf of YBM. At this meeting Bogatin attempted to

refute the information provided by Fairfax indicating that there was

no clear proof. Fairfax stood by its findings. Mitchell indicated

that Fairfax might receive a call from certain underwriters.

36. At no time prior to May 13, 1998 was Fairfax contacted by anyone

to discuss the work which they undertook on behalf of YBM. In

particular, Fairfax was not contacted by any Director of YBM who did

not participate in the meetings noted above. Nor was Fairfax

contacted by any person identifying themselves as a representative

of the underwriters. At no time did Fairfax express to YBM or its

advisors any reluctance to speak with underwriters or any other

third parties at the direction of YBM.

37. A copy of the "Report of the Special Committee to the Board of

Directors YBM Magnex International Inc. April 2, 1997" was provided

to FMSL and to counsel for the underwriters. The word "Draft" is

written on the upper right-hand corner of the document. According to

counsel for the underwriters, the contents of this report were fully

and fairly described by Mitchell at a meeting attended by a

representative of GMP. Information contained within this report may

be summarized as follows:

a) U.S. Counsel for YBM was advised "off the record" by the U.S.

Attorney's Office that there was an "ongoing investigation"

involving YBM; while unable to uncover further particulars counsel

confirmed that U.S. law enforcement agencies had placed a priority

on uncovering infiltration of organized crime from the former Soviet

Union into U.S. business; on August 15, 1996 YBM management informed

the Board of Directors of its discussions, through counsel, with the

U.S. Attorney's Office;

b) on August 29, 1996 a Special Committee was formed to investigate

the situation; counsel for YBM advised that due to a lack of clarity

surrounding the matter, public disclosure should not be made at that

time;

c) the mandate of the Special Committee was to independently

investigate possible areas of concern arising out of the Company's

business operations to attempt to determine the basis for any

investigation and to recommend further action to address any

problems or potential problems uncovered;

d) the initial review of the Special Committee focused on

shareholder and employees/commissioned salespeople, and on

contractual arrangements with customers; these two areas were chosen

as a focus "because the greatest threat to the Company would be an

investigation which questioned the legitimacy of its core business";

e) the Special Committee reviewed the original shareholders list;

this review did not raise any concerns, but the Special Committee

nevertheless undertook a further review;

f) there is no evidence that the existence of any investigation has

impacted on trading whatsoever; "Accordingly, the Committee assumes

that, to date, in accordance with the strict direction of the Board,

the information has not been disclosed to parties outside the

Company, its Board and advisors";

g) the initial review of the Special Committee identified very

substantial commission payments paid by Arbat which seemed

inconsistent with Arbat's business;

h) the Special Committee was concerned about one set of parallel

records which showed substantial payments to a person on one set and

the exact same payments to a corporate entity with a different name

on another; later a third version was identified and had different

amounts and payees; management of YBM had no explanation for this;

i) on November 1, 1996 the Special Committee reported to the Board

on the initial review recommending that further investigation of the

original shareholders be undertaken and that commissions paid also

be reviewed; it was recommended that experts in this type of

investigation be engaged as soon as possible;

j) the Special Committee retained Fairfax, a large U.S. consulting

organization operated by former senior Justice Department, State

Department and F.B.I. officials; Fairfax came highly recommended and

exhibited a strong track record with respect to dealings in Eastern

Europe;

k) Fairfax was requested by the Special Committee to: discover more

details respecting the "ongoing investigation"; do background checks

on management and the original shareholders; do background checks on

recipients of commissions; randomly examine business transactions

recorded in the records of the Company to ascertain if bona fide;

and review YBM operations and make recommendations regarding

improved controls;

l) the Results of the Fairfax review [as reported in the "Report of

the Special Committee to the Board of Directors YBM Magnex

International Inc. April 2, 1997" which was provided to FMSL]

included the following:

i) initial background checks on management showed no concerns

regarding Bogatin or other managers located in the United States; in

Eastern Europe, however, a number of concerns arose; recipients of

Arbat commissions in 1993-95 had clear ties to Russian organized

crime; another recipient of commissions from Arbat was incarcerated

in Switzerland; the basis of these payments appears to be

unsupportable; even though Arbat was sold it was under the operating

control of one of the original shareholders; Arbat was identified as

an alleged vehicle for criminal acts;

ii) the original transaction respecting the acquisition of the

equipment "was not as originally described"; prices paid were not as

recorded on invoices; invoices were prepared well after the fact;

the price paid by original shareholders for the equipment "is a

fraction of the face value taken back by the original shareholders

in preferred shares";

iii) "A second area of concern raised by Fairfax was the commingling

of the business activities of Magnex RT, United Trade (the offshore

sales arm of YBM) and those of the original shareholders resident in

Budapest. The same office building was being used to transact

activities for all the businesses and [one original shareholder] in

particular was actively involved in activities related to United

Trade and Magnex RT despite not being an officer or employee of

either company. There was a bank account (since terminated) through

which Company business was transacted to which [this original

shareholder] was a signing officer. Management has already taken

steps to relocate office activities and ensure proper separation";

this same original shareholder has a long-standing friendship with

YBM's Chief Operating Officer; "foreign sources also connect the

original shareholders with criminal activities including

prostitution although none have been convicted or are wanted by

authorities";

iv) there were a substantial number of cash transactions, in

particular payment of salaries and commissions; there was a large

volume of cash on hand; management has already taken steps to

severely restrict the use of cash payments; and

v) the customer lists were reviewed and it was very difficult to

establish end users for the products because of the use of

intermediate agents for most sales;

m) the Conclusions of the Special Committee included the following:

i) there is no evidence that "senior management of YBM is in any way

involved in any illegal or improper activities";

ii) that in respect of the questions surrounding the original

shareholders, "it is not surprising that allegations should be made

at successful businessmen of Russian origin trading between the

Former Soviet Union and the West";

iii) the original shareholders, in aggregate, control over 40% of

YBM common stock; "the existence of this block of shareholders is of

concern to the Committee. This concern will be reduced following the

completion of the equity issue to fund the Crucible acquisition...";

and

iv) the Committee directed management to eliminate any ties to the

original shareholders in the "day-to-day operations of the Company";

n) the Recommendations of the Special Committee were as follows:

"a) Provide the Board with an action plan to address each of the

following areas:

- Elimination of commingling of business activity with that of

Company shareholders in Europe;

- Establish operational controls to ensure that management remains

operationally independent from the founding shareholders;

- Establishment of improved cash controls in Hungary;

- The setting of more detailed customer and agent approval criteria;

- The establishment of an accurate data base on these customers and

agents;

- Consolidation of accounting control in Newtown; and

- Engage a major accounting firm for the completion of future

audits.

b) Establish a permanent subcommittee of the Board or the Audit

Committee to supervise compliance with these recommendations and

other issues surrounding corporate ethics in the future.

c) Advise the underwriters financing the acquisition of Crucible as

to the background and results of this investigation.

d) Consider the establishment of a voluntary escrow of the Original

Shareholders' shares until the completion of the acquisition and the

clearance of the associated Special Warrants." [emphasis added]

38. On April 25, 1997 there was a meeting of the YBM Board of

Directors held in Toronto. The meeting was attended by all of the

Directors with the exception of Fisherman. Among others in

attendance were Gatti and Wilder. Among the items on the agenda for

this meeting was the "Report of Special Committee", which discussion

was to be led by Mitchell.

39. Mitchell has indicated that a version of the report marked

"BOARD DISCUSSION DRAFT", substantially similar to the version of

the report provided to FMSL summarized above, was presented to the

Directors at the April 25, 1997 Board meeting. Approved minutes of

this meeting have not been identified.

40. One set of draft minutes of the April 25, 1997 Board meeting

simply states that "Mitchell updated the Board on the findings of

the Special Committee. He stated that a draft report would be tabled

at the next meeting". Another set of draft minutes for the April 25,

1997 Board meeting records that "Mitchell updated the Board on the

findings of the Special Committee. His report encompassed the

following". These draft minutes then record, word for word, what was

ultimately disclosed by YBM in their AIF (see paragraph 15 above).

41. Two sets of handwritten notes (identified below as Note 1 and

Note 2) of the April 25, 1997 Board meeting, obtained from the

records of YBM's Canadian general counsel, record the following in

respect of the Board's discussion of the Special Committee:

Note 1:

-Special Matter - Owen

-mgmt brought it to our attention

Fairfax engaged

-confirmed active investigation

-payments made by Arbat

-to alleged crime figures

-not material amounts but

significant dollar amounts

-at first opportunity, sold bus.

-Isvestia [sic] article

-retracted

-[an original shareholder] - associated with OC but never charged or

convicted

-[an original shareholder] - alleged – KGB

Concern

-large cash transactions - mgmt fixing

-co - mingling - [an original shareholder] - fixed

-adequacy of acctg - being fixed

-preferred shares - issued for $11M(U.S.)

- FMV of equip valued in $11M

- acquired equipment for much less

-Coopers hired to do valuation

- came in very high

Note 2:

Special Committee

Written report to be worked [?] with counsel

*Arbat - trade goods in Soviet Union

Payments made as commissions to Org Crime

first opportunity sold business

*Newspaper Article

Crime figures a shareholder

Only 1 - [an original shareholder]

3 individuals receiving commission questionable

original shareholder no record

sources associate them

[an original shareholder] believed to be former KGB

sits on Russian Anti-Crime Commission

Fairfax says sources tell them they are involved with bad people

*Assess [?] Hungary facility

interview 5 of original 6 shareholders

background check of buyers

Clearly there is business

customers & suppliers

They found 3 or 4 areas of concern

1) large amount of cash transactions

European Tax Plan

Issue being addressed

2) Excessive commingling activities

of company with original shareholders

Management addressing

3) Accounting records not NA stand

Improving them

systems should not be able to

be overwritten

4) Original purchase of equipment

Equipment for shares

11 mill assessed value

invoices created at a latter date

price paid actually about 1/10

US Customers

list of purchasers

Initial great concern

Agent addresses - endusers

were real. A lot of NA

sales booked through agent address

in Russia/Ukraine

Segment information correct

Fairfax satisfied.

V. The Alleged Failure to Disclose a Material Change

42. On December 3, 1997 D&T agreed to serve as auditors for YBM and

to conduct the audit of YBM's annual financial statements for the

year ending December 31, 1997.

43. On March 19, 1998 Bogatin sent a memo to the Vice-President of

Finance for UTL, copied to the Audit Committee of the YBM Board

(Antes, Mitchell & Greenwald), and to Fisherman and Gatti, stating:

As you may be aware, we have not yet received the 1997 audit report.

Deloitte & Touche is reluctant to issue their report until the Board

of Directors of YBM evaluates the reckless actions of United Trade

related to the escrow agreements signed in December 1997. If you are

unaware, United Trade entered into these agreements without anyone's

knowledge or approval. Moreover, the money [US$32.2 million] was

placed with an unacceptable offshore bank.

44. On March 23, 1998 D&T met with the YBM Audit Committee. At this

meeting D&T brought to the Audit Committee's attention significant

accounting and business issues including management's lack of

internal controls over material liquid assets of the Company. D&T

provided the Audit Committee with a list of certain transactions in

respect of which D&T expressed concerns. The Audit Committee

undertook to develop a detailed plan to investigate these

transactions to the satisfaction of D&T. D&T informed the Audit

Committee that in order to complete its audit, D&T would need to

review and consider the results of the investigation. It was

anticipated that the investigation would take several weeks.

45. In a memo dated April 7, 1998 Gatti provided to the Audit

Committee a summary of the various transactions which were

identified by D&T as requiring further inquiry by the Audit

Committee. Gatti noted the following:

Since its inception, United Trade has controlled its own cash.

United Trade management has been able to authorize and execute

transactions consistent with running its day-to-day operations. My

arrival in January 1996 did not result in a modification to this

delegation of authority.

Since January 1996, corporate finance has made many operating

changes and improvements in Hungary. However, there have been other

proposed changes and improvements, including moving cash management

to corporate headquarters that have not been endorsed by the CEO and

COO. The transactions above validate the need to establish greater

cash controls from corporate headquarters.

46. On April 9, 1998 YBM held a meeting of the Board of Directors in

Philadelphia. According to minutes of the meeting all members of the

Board were in attendance. Mitchell presented to the Board the

concerns raised by D&T respecting certain transactions involving

escrow arrangements, acquisitions and the identity of the escrow

agent. Mitchell also reviewed an additional "spin-off concern"

identified by D&T: that the Company engaged in related party

transactions whereby suppliers of magnets, providers of goods and

services, buyers of magnets and sellers of technology to YBM were,

in certain circumstances, the same parties. Mitchell advised the

Board that a detailed review of the transactions was required. The

Board resolved that the Audit Committee be authorized to "to

investigate and ascertain the facts" respecting the various

transactions in respect of which D&T had expressed concerns, and

directed the Audit Committee to report their findings to the Board

and D&T.

47. On April 19, 1998 D&T participated in a conference call with

Antes, Mitchell and YBM's U.S. Counsel. During the course of the

meeting D&T indicated that since March 23, 1998 they had tried to

get comfortable with some of the questioned transactions but had

been unable to do so. D&T advised that a forensic investigation was

required. D&T told the Company that it was in a "stop position" and

that no further audit procedures or any other service would be

rendered by D&T on behalf of YBM.

48. By letter dated April 20, 1998 from D&T to Mitchell, copied to

Antes, D&T confirmed their discussion on April 19, 1998 indicating

that the information they had received to date had made them

"extremely concerned"; that there was uncertainty respecting the

status of certain entities involved in the questioned transactions

and that certain individuals associated with these entities and

related entities were reputed to have ties to organized crime. D&T

further advised that "the information obtained heightens our serious

concerns that these transactions may be bogus and are being used to

cover the flow of money between these companies for other purposes".

49. In the letter of April 20, 1998 D&T also reiterated its request

for an in-depth forensic investigation and that such investigation

should not involve management of YBM. D&T also stated the following:

We will not perform any further audit procedures or other services

for YBM until the Committee completes its investigation and all

matters are resolved to our satisfaction. Upon completion of the

investigation, Deloitte &Touche will need to make a determination

(i) whether it is willing to continue to be associated with YBM;

(ii) whether it is able to issue an opinion on YBM's 1997 financial

statements; and (iii) whether it will continue to be associated with

YBM's 1996 financial statements.

We believe that it is highly unlikely that these issues can be

resolved by your April 30 filing deadline. We are also concerned

that you have released your 1997 earnings. Accordingly, we recommend

that you consult with your securities counsel to address these

issues.

50. On April 27, 1998 YBM issued a news release in which YBM

announced its results from operations for the three month period

ending March 31, 1998. YBM reported that net income had increased

94.6% compared to the year before and that sales had increased

38.2%. The news release contained no information respecting the 1997

audit.

51. On April 28, 1998 D&T informed Mitchell and Antes that it was

concerned that YBM had released its first quarter earnings for 1998,

having regard to the fact that the issues relating to the questioned

transactions which occurred in 1997 had not been resolved and may

have an impact upon first quarter earnings. D&T also recommended

that:

...you consult with your securities counsel to address the Company's

need to disclose to the Ontario Securities Commission and the public

that the audit of the Company's 1997 financial statements has been

suspended pending the completion of an investigation by the Audit

Committee....

52. On May 8, 1998 D&T once again informed Mitchell and Antes that

it was concerned that the Company had released its first quarter

results but had failed to disclose that D&T had suspended its audit.

53. On May 8, 1998 YBM issued a news release announcing that it was

in the process of filing an application with the securities

regulators seeking a 45-day extension from the May 20, 1998 deadline

for filing and mailing its 1997 audited financial statements to

shareholders. In the news release YBM disclosed that the reason for

the application was that "it is possible that it [YBM] will not

receive an audit report on its 1997 financial statements from its

auditors, Deloitte & Touche LLP, in time to meet the required filing

and mailing deadline". YBM disclosed that "as part of concluding its

audit" D&T had requested that the Board of Directors conduct an

independent review of certain aspects of the Company's business and

operations in Eastern Europe. As to the reason for this review YBM

stated:

Management attributes the extensiveness of the audit and the

requirement for this review to the fact that business practices in

the Company's major market, Eastern Europe, differ from those in

North America due to the relatively early stage of development of

the Eastern European market economies.

54. On May 8, 1998, YBM's Canadian general counsel filed an

application with the Commission on behalf of YBM seeking a 45-day

extension from the May 20, 1998 deadline for filing and mailing its

1997 audited financial statements to shareholders. In this

application, it is stated:

The Company completed an offering of 3.2 million common shares by

way of short-form prospectus on November 26, 1997. In connection

with its review of the prospectus, the Corporate Finance and

Enforcement Branches of the Ontario Securities Commission (the

"Commission") made certain inquiries into the Company's business,

operations and public disclosure record. To the knowledge of the

Company, the inquiries have not been concluded and the Company has

not been advised of any finding by the Commission in connection with

such inquiries. Largely as a result of the ongoing and increased

scrutiny by the Commission, on April 20, 1998, subsequent to the

completion of virtually all of the substantive portion of the

Company's 1997 audit, the Company's auditors, Deloitte & Touche LLP

("D&T") requested that the Company perform an in-depth independent

investigation (the "Investigation") to confirm the identity of

certain parties to certain transactions involving the Company and

generally to confirm the veracity of certain transactions underlying

the Company's business.

55. On May 13, 1998 the Commission issued a temporary cease trade

order in respect of the securities of YBM. This order remains in

effect.

VI. The Allegation that Information Submitted to Staff was

Misleading or Untrue

56. In a letter dated July 4, 1997 signed by Wilder and submitted to

Staff of the Commission on behalf of YBM (see paragraph 19 above)

the following statements were made:

As discussed above, the Confirming Accountant will be in a position

to deliver its report to you no later than Tuesday, July 8, 1997.

Based upon the results reported to date, we believe that the report

will represent a continuation of the series of favourable due

diligence results pertaining to the business of YBM conducted by

independent parties. This stands in stark contrast to the rumors and

innuendo to which YBM has been subject and which , based upon the

information provided to us to date, have not been subject to any