| IsoEnergy to Acquire Toro Energy, Strengthening a Top-Tier Uranium Portfolio in a Rising Market 
 newswire.ca
 
 News provided by 				 					 						 							 								  							 						 						IsoEnergy Ltd. 							 								 									 								 							 							 						 						 					 				 				Oct 12, 2025, 18:22 ET
 
 TORONTO, Oct. 12, 2025 /CNW/ - PERTH, Australia - Oct. 13, 2025 - IsoEnergy Ltd. ("IsoEnergy") (NYSE American: ISOU) (TSX:  ISO) and Toro Energy Ltd. ("Toro") (ASX: TOE) are pleased to announce that they have entered into a scheme implementation deed (the "SID")  pursuant to which, among other things, IsoEnergy has agreed to acquire  all of the issued and outstanding ordinary shares of Toro (the "Toro Shares")1 by way of a scheme of arrangement under Australia's Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (the "Transaction" or the "Scheme"),  subject to the satisfaction of various conditions. Toro owns 100% of  the Wiluna Uranium Project, located 30km south of the town of Wiluna in  the northern goldfields of Western Australia ("Wiluna Uranium Project").
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   Mineral Resource Estimates of Toro Energy (CNW Group/IsoEnergy Ltd.)
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
 
 Scheme Implementation Deed - IsoEnergy Limited, Toro Energy Limited (CNW Group/IsoEnergy Ltd.)
 
 
 
 
 
 On implementation of the Transaction, the two  companies will combine to strengthen IsoEnergy's development pipeline by  adding Toro's high-quality, scoping-stage Wiluna Uranium Project in  Western Australia to IsoEnergy's existing portfolio, which includes  past-producing U.S. mines, the ultra-high-grade Hurricane deposit in  Canada's Athabasca Basin and a diversified suite of development and  exploration assets across Canada, the U.S. and Australia. Toro  shareholders will gain exposure to a larger, more diversified portfolio  of high-quality uranium exploration, development and near-term  production assets in tier-one jurisdictions in an enlarged, liquid  vehicle while retaining direct exposure to the Wiluna Uranium Project  and all other Toro assets.
 
 
 
 Under the terms of the Transaction, Toro shareholders will receive 0.036 of a common share of IsoEnergy (each whole share, an "ISO Share") for each Toro Share held on the Scheme record date (the "Exchange Ratio").  Existing shareholders of IsoEnergy and Toro will own approximately  92.9% and 7.1% on a fully-diluted in-the-money basis, respectively, of  the outstanding ISO Shares upon implementation of the Transaction.2
 
 The Exchange Ratio implies consideration of A$0.584 per Toro Share, representing:3
 
 
 The implied fully-diluted in-the-money equity value of the Transaction is equal to approximately A$75.0million (C$68.1million).4a 79.7% premium to the last traded price on the ASX of A$0.325 per Toro Share, on October 10, 2025; anda 92.2% premium to Toro's 20-day volume weighted average price ("VWAP") on the ASX as at October 10, 2025.
 
 _________________________
 1 Other than those held by or on behalf of members of the IsoEnergy Group.
 2 Based on a pro-forma fully diluted in-the-money shares outstanding of 62,423,144 of the combined entity.
 3  Based on the closing price of the ISO Shares over all Canadian  exchanges on October 10, 2025 of C$14.73 and an AUD:CAD exchange rate of  0.9078.
 4 Based on a Toro's  fully diluted in-the-money shares outstanding of 128,406,848. The  implied value is not fixed and depends on the price at which ISO Shares  trade.
 
 Strategic Rationale
 
 
 _____________________________ Tier One Uranium Portfolio – The combination of IsoEnergy's  past-producing U.S. mines, the ultra-high-grade Hurricane deposit in  Canada's Athabasca Basin, and multiple development/exploration assets  across Canada, the U.S. and Australia with Toro's flagship Wiluna  Uranium Project in Western Australia, creates a development-ready  platform with significant near-term production potential in stable,  mining-friendly jurisdictions. The Wiluna Uranium Project--comprising  the Centipede-Millipede, Lake Way and Lake Maitland deposits--is a  scoping-level project with mineral resources that complement IsoEnergy's  development pipeline.
 
 Significantly Expands and Diversifies Uranium Resource Base – The pro forma company ("Merged Group") will hold current NI 43-101 compliant resources of 55.2 Mlbs U3O8 M&I and 4.9 Mlbs U3O8 Inferred5, and JORC 2012 and 2004 compliant resources of 78.1 Mlbs U3O8 M&I and 34.6 U3O8 Mlbs Inferred6  (please see the table on page 26 of this announcement for the breakdown  of the JORC 2012 and 2004 compliant resources). The Merged Group will  also hold historical resources of 154.3 Mlbs U3O8 M&I and 88.2 Mlbs U3O8 Inferred, establishing a robust and geographically diversified resource base7.8
 Cautionary statement:  The pro forma Merged Group resources include foreign and historical  estimates reported by IsoEnergy. These estimates are not reported in  accordance with the JORC Code. A competent person has not done  sufficient work to classify the historical estimates or foreign  estimates as Mineral Resources or Ore Reserves in accordance with the  JORC Code. It is uncertain that following evaluation and/or further  exploration work that the historical estimates or foreign estimates will  be able to be reported as Mineral Resources or Ore Reserves in  accordance with the JORC Code.
 
 
 Strengthens Merged Group's Exposure to Top Uranium Jurisdictions  – Wiluna will become IsoEnergy's flagship Australian project. Australia  ranks #1 globally for uranium resources and was a Top-5 producer in  2024, supported by strong infrastructure and mining institutions9.  Western Australia hosts significant undeveloped uranium projects,  including Kintyre and Yeelirrie (Cameco) and Mulga Rock (Deep Yellow).  Toro shareholders will have exposure to IsoEnergy's significant  near-term production potential in stable, mining friendly jurisdictions  in Canada and parts of the U.S.
 
 Well-Timed to Capitalize on Strong Nuclear Market Momentum  – The  World Nuclear Association's 2025 Fuel Report projects uranium demand to  rise ~30% by 2030 and to more than double by 2040. A strengthened  resource base and diversified jurisdictional exposure is expected to  position IsoEnergy to benefit from rapidly tightening supply/demand  outlook.
 
 Well Placed to Pursue Value Accretive Growth Opportunities –  The Merged Group will have significant balance sheet strength and  access to capital markets to fund the Merged Group's portfolio including  Toro's existing projects.
 5  For additional information on the current resources for the Tony M Mine  and Larocque East Project see the Tony M Technical Report and the  Larocque East Technical Report, respectively. See Disclaimer on  IsoEnergy Mineral Resource Estimates below for additional details.
 6  Based on updated mineral resource estimates for the Wiluna Uranium  Project Deposits of Lake Maitland announced by Toro on September 24,  2024 and Centipede-Millipede and Lake Way announced by Toro on March 7,  2024, the Dawson Hinkler Satellite Deposit announced by Toro on May 2,  2024, the Nowthanna Deposit announced by Toro on February 1, 2016 and  the Theseus Project, announced by Toro on December 5, 2012, prepared in  accordance with JORC Code 2012, except Theseus which is in accordance  with JORC Code 2004. Information contained in this announcement in  connection with the Theseus Project was prepared and first disclosed  under the JORC Code 2004.  It has not been updated since to comply with  the JORC Code 2012 on the basis that the information has not materially  changed since it was last reported. The JORC Table 1 relevant to all of  the Toro resource estimates can be found in Toro's ASX announcement of  September 24, 2024 (titled "Significant Expansion Stated Lake Maitland  Uranium Resource", except for Theseus, which is found in Toro's ASX  announcement of December 5, 2012 (titled "Maiden Inferred Uranium  Resource for Toro's Theseus Deposit"). For the purposes of ASX Listing  Rule 5.23, Toro confirms that it is not aware of any new information or  data that materially affects the information included in those original  announcements, and that all material assumptions and technical  parameters underpinning the estimates in the original announcements  continue to apply and have not materially changed.
 7  These mineral resources are considered to be "historical estimates" as  defined under National Instrument 43-101 - Standards of Disclosure for  Mineral Projects ("NI 43-101"). A Qualified Person has not done  sufficient work to classify the historical estimates as current mineral  resources or mineral reserves and IsoEnergy is not treating the  historical estimates as current mineral resources. See Disclaimer on  Mineral Resource Estimates below for additional details.
 8 Refer to the Pro forma Mineral Resources disclaimer on page 10.
 9 World Nuclear Association - world-nuclear.org
 
 Philip  Williams, CEO and Director of IsoEnergy, commented, "The acquisition of  Toro Energy marks another important step in advancing IsoEnergy's  strategy to build a globally diversified, development-ready uranium  platform. The Wiluna Uranium Project strengthens our portfolio with a  large, previously permitted asset in a top-tier jurisdiction at a time  when global nuclear demand is accelerating. This transaction positions  IsoEnergy to deliver meaningful scale, optionality, and sustained value  creation for shareholders. We look forward to welcoming the Toro team,  who have done an admirable job stewarding the company and its projects  through often challenging markets, to IsoEnergy and advancing the  project together."
 
 Richard Homsany, Executive Chairman of Toro,  commented, "This Transaction creates significant value for our  shareholders, representing a material premium for Toro shareholders of  79.7% to Toro's last traded price and 92.2% to Toro's 20 day VWAP. It  also provides Toro shareholders the opportunity to be part of a larger,  leading uranium company listed on the TSX and NYSE. Toro shareholders  will have exposure to a diverse uranium portfolio that has strong growth  potential and is located in favourable regulatory jurisdictions, and  the ability to attract enhanced access to funding including for the  Wiluna Uranium Project.
 
 The Toro team will benefit from the  significant financial strength of ISO and looks forward to working  together on the successful development of the Wiluna Uranium Project for  all stakeholders."
 
 Anticipated Benefits to IsoEnergy shareholders
 
 
 Anticipated Benefits to Toro shareholdersSecures Wiluna Uranium Project, positioned for potential  development, pending alignment of government policy with uranium  production in Western AustraliaStrengthens ranking among the Australian uranium players, on the  basis of potential production capacity, advanced mining assets and  resource exposureAddition of large scale mineral resource at the scoping study stage  with an exploration portfolio hosting additional uranium resourcesOpportunity for re-rating through de-risking near-term potential  production and enhancing scale and asset diversification across key  jurisdictions in the U.S., Canada and AustraliaCreation of a larger platform with greater scale for M&A, access to capital and liquidity
 
 
 Toro IBC Recommendations and Major Shareholders IntentionsImmediate and significant premium of 79.7% to last close and 92.2%  based on the respective 20-day VWAPs of both companies, ending on  October 10, 202510Exposure to a larger, more diversified portfolio of high-quality  uranium exploration, development and near-term production assets in  tier-one jurisdictions of U.S. and CanadaEntry into the Athabasca Basin, a leading uranium jurisdiction, with the high-grade Hurricane depositUpside from an accelerated path to potential production as well as from synergies with IsoEnergy's other Utah uranium assetsToro shareholders will be exposed to geographic project locations  within the Merged Group outside of Western Australia including  favourable uranium regulatory jurisdictions such as Canada and parts of  the U.S.Continued exposure to Toro's Wiluna Uranium Project through holding  of approximately 7.1% of the outstanding fully diluted in-the-money ISO  Shares on closing of the Transaction11A Merged Group backed by corporate and institutional investors of  IsoEnergy, including NexGen Energy Ltd., Energy Fuels Inc., Mega Uranium  Ltd. and uranium ETFsIncreased scale expected to provide greater access to capital for  project development and on potentially more favourable terms, increased  trading liquidity, wider research coverage and greater scale for M&A
 
 Following receipt of an initial, confidential non-binding indicative offer from IsoEnergy, the Toro Board of Directors (the "Toro Board") established an independent board committee ("Toro IBC"),  comprising Richard Homsany and Michel Marier, to consider the proposal.  The Toro Board formed the Toro IBC since Richard Patricio (a Toro  non-executive director) is also the Chair of the Board of Directors of  IsoEnergy.
 
 The Toro IBC, and the Board of Directors of IsoEnergy  (with Mr. Patricio abstaining from voting) have each unanimously  approved the SID. A copy of the SID is included at Annexure A of this  announcement.
 
 The Toro IBC unanimously recommends that Toro  shareholders vote in favour of the Scheme in the absence of a superior  proposal and subject to the independent expert's report concluding that  the Scheme is in the best interests of Toro shareholders (other than  IsoEnergy). Subject to the same qualifications, each member of the Toro  IBC intends to vote, or procure the voting of, all Toro Shares held or  controlled by them in favour of the Scheme. As at the date of this  announcement, the Toro IBC collectively has a relevant interest in 1.8%  of the Toro Shares on issue.
 
 Substantial shareholder Mega Uranium  Ltd. (together with its associate Mega Redport Pty Ltd) (representing  15,226,256 Toro Shares, being 12.7% of all Toro Shares) have provided  Toro with a voting intention statement that they each intend to vote in  favour of the Scheme, subject to no superior proposal emerging and the  independent expert concluding (and continuing to conclude) that the  Scheme is in the best interests of Toro shareholders (other than  IsoEnergy).12
 
 As at the date of this announcement  IsoEnergy holds 6,000,000 Toro Shares (approximately 4.99% of Toro  shares on issue at the date of this announcement).
 
 __________________________
 10  Based on the closing price of the ISO Shares on the TSX of $14.73, a  closing price of A$0.325 of Toro Shares on the ASX and an AUD:CAD  exchange rate of 0.9078 on October 10, 2025 and a 20-day VWAP for the  period ending October 10, 2025 of Toro Shares on the ASX of A$0.304
 11 Based on a pro-forma fully diluted in-the-money shares outstanding of 62,423,144 of the combined entity
 12 Mega  Uranium Ltd and Mega Redport Pty Ltd have each consented to the  inclusion of this voting intention statement in this document.
 
 Conditions to completion of the Scheme
 
 Implementation of the Scheme is subject to various conditions, including (among others):
 
 
 The SID provides for customary deal protection provisions with  respect to Toro, including "no shop" as well as "no talk" and "no due  diligence" restrictions (subject to customary exceptions to enable the  Toro IBC to comply with its fiduciary and statutory  duties), notification obligations and a matching right regime in the  event any superior proposal is received by Toro. In addition, the SID  provides that, under certain circumstances, IsoEnergy or Toro would be  entitled to a break fee which, should either become payable, is  approximately A$700,000.13Approval of Toro shareholders in relation to the Scheme (including  approval of more than 50% of the number of Toro shareholders voting and  at least 75% of the total votes cast);Court approval in relation to the Scheme;No formal changes in Western Australian uranium policy to permit  uranium mining and/or mining or development of all or any part of the  Wiluna Uranium Project;All Toro unquoted options having lapsed, been exercised, or cancelled;Certain regulatory approvals, including Foreign Investment Review Board of Australia, the Australian Securities Exchange ("ASX"), the Toronto Stock Exchange (the "TSX") and the NYSE American LLC ("NYSE");An independent expert concluding (and continuing to conclude) that  the Scheme is in the best interests of Toro shareholders (other than  IsoEnergy); andNo material adverse change or prescribed occurrences (each as  defined in the SID) occurring in relation to either IsoEnergy or Toro  and no regulatory restraints.
 
 Following implementation of  the Transaction, the ISO Shares will continue trading on the TSX and  NYSE and Toro will be removed from the official list of ASX. If  determined appropriate in the future, IsoEnergy may apply for admission  to the official list of ASX, and quotation of the ISO Shares on ASX. Any  such listing, if pursued, will be subject to IsoEnergy complying with  the rules and policies of the ASX in force at such time.  IsoEnergy cautions that no decision has been made to apply for an ASX  listing, and that it is not a condition of the Transaction that such a  listing be pursued. Approximately 54.7 million ISO Shares are currently  outstanding on a non-diluted basis and approximately 58.0 million ISO  Shares are currently outstanding on a fully-diluted basis. Upon  implementation of the Transaction (assuming no additional issuances of  ISO Shares or Toro Shares), there will be approximately 59.2 million ISO  Shares outstanding on a non-diluted basis and approximately 62.4  million ISO Shares outstanding on a fully-diluted basis.
 
 Toro  option holders who validly exercise their Toro options and are issued  Toro Shares prior to the Scheme record date will be entitled to  participate in the Scheme. Toro and IsoEnergy propose to enter into  option cancellation deeds with holders of unquoted Toro options (all of  which are "out-of-the-money" as at the date of this announcement)  pursuant to which the options will, subject to (among other things) the  Scheme being approved and becoming effective, be cancelled for a cash  payment and/or ISO share issuance14 based on a form of Black-Scholes valuation methodology.
 
 Furthermore,  Toro must ensure that all unvested Toro performance rights  automatically vest in accordance with their terms upon the Scheme  becoming effective and must procure that prior to the Scheme record  date, each Toro performance right is converted, such that the relevant  Toro performance rights holders are entitled to participate in the  Scheme.
 
 ________________________________
 13 Equivalent to approximately C$635,000, based on an AUD:CAD exchange rate of 0.9078.
 14 Implied price of the ISO share issuance to be subject approval of the TSX
 
 Timetable
 
 Shareholders of Toro will be asked to approve the Scheme at a shareholder meeting which is expected to be held in early 2026.
 
 Full  particulars of the Scheme will be provided to Toro shareholders in the  Scheme Booklet which will include the Independent Expert Report, the  reasons for the Independent Toro Directors' recommendation and an  explanatory statement in respect of the Scheme.
 
 It is expected  that the Scheme Booklet will be dispatched to Toro shareholders in early  2026. Toro shareholders are not required to take any action at this  stage in relation to the Scheme. It is expected that the Transaction  will close in first half of 2026, subject to satisfaction of all  conditions, including receipt of all necessary approvals.
 
 Advisors
 
 SCP  Resource Finance LP is acting as financial advisor to IsoEnergy.  Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP is acting as Canadian legal advisor,  Hamilton Locke is acting as Australian legal advisor and Paul, Weiss,  Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP as US legal advisor to IsoEnergy.
 
 Canaccord Genuity is acting as financial advisor to Toro. Cardinals Lawyers and Consultants is acting as legal advisor to Toro.
 
 Qualified Person Statement
 
 The  scientific and technical information contained in this news release  with respect to IsoEnergy was reviewed and approved Dr. Dan Brisbin,  P.Geo., IsoEnergy's Vice President, Exploration, who is a "Qualified  Person" (as defined in NI 43-101 – Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects ("NI 43-101")).
 
 Each  of the mineral resource estimates in respect of IsoEnergy contained in  this news release, except for the Larocque East project and the Tony M  mine, are considered to be "historical estimates" as defined under NI  43-101 and are not considered to be current. See "Disclaimer on  Historical Mineral Resource Estimates" for additional details.
 
 See "Disclaimer  on IsoEnergy Mineral Resource Estimates" and Disclaimer on IsoEnergy  Historical Mineral Resource Estimates" below for additional details.
 
 The  scientific and technical information contained in this news release  with respect to Toro was prepared by Dr. Greg Shirtliff, Geology Manager  of Toro, who is a Member of the Australian Institute of Mining and  Metallurgy and "Competent Person" as defined Joint Ore Reserves  Committee (JORC) 2012 Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration  Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves. Mr Shirtliff consents to  the inclusion in this release of the matters based on that information  in the form and context in which it appears.
 
 About IsoEnergy
 
 IsoEnergy (NYSE American: ISOU; TSX:  ISO)  is a leading, globally diversified uranium company with substantial  current and historical mineral resources in top uranium mining  jurisdictions of Canada, the U.S. and Australia at varying stages of  development, providing near-, medium- and long-term leverage to rising  uranium prices.
 
 IsoEnergy is currently advancing its Larocque East  project in Canada's Athabasca basin, which is home to the Hurricane  deposit, boasting the world's highest-grade indicated uranium mineral  resource. IsoEnergy also holds a portfolio of permitted past-producing,  conventional uranium and vanadium mines in Utah with a toll milling  arrangement in place with Energy Fuels. These mines are currently on  standby, ready for rapid restart as market conditions permit,  positioning IsoEnergy as a near-term uranium producer.
 
 About Toro Energy
 
 Toro  Energy Limited (ASX:TOE) is an ASX listed uranium development and  exploration company with projects in Western Australia. Toro is  committed to building an energy metals business with the flagship Wiluna  Uranium Project as the centrepiece. The Wiluna Uranium Project consists  of the Centipede-Millipede, Lake Maitland and Lake Way uranium deposits  30km to the south of the town of Wiluna in Western Australia's northern  goldfields.
 
 Toro is committed to safe and sustainable uranium  production and has health, safety, environment and community policies in  place to underpin this commitment.
 
 No securities regulatory authority has either approved or disapproved of the contents of this news release.
 
 Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Information
 
 This  press release contains "forward-looking statements" within the meaning  of the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995  and "forward-looking information" within the meaning of applicable  Canadian securities legislation (collectively, referred to as  "forward-looking information"). Generally, forward-looking information  can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as  "plans", "expects" or "does not expect", "is expected", "budget",  "scheduled", "estimates", "forecasts", "intends", "anticipates" or "does  not anticipate", or "believes", or variations of such words and phrases  or state that certain actions, events or results "may", "could",  "would", "might" or "will be taken", "occur" or "be achieved". The  forward-looking information includes statements with respect to the  consummation and timing of the Transaction; receipt and timing of  approval of Toro shareholders with respect to the Transaction; the  anticipated benefits of the Transaction to the parties and their  respective shareholders; the expected receipt of court, regulatory and  other consents and approvals relating to the Transaction; the expected  ownership interest of IsoEnergy shareholders and Toro shareholders in  the Merged Group; anticipated strategic and growth opportunities for the  Merged Group; the successful integration of the businesses of IsoEnergy  and Toro; the prospects of each companies' respective projects,  including mineral resources estimates and mineralization of each  project; the potential for, success of and anticipated timing of  commencement of future commercial production at the companies'  properties, including expectations with respect to any permitting,  development or other work that may be required to bring any of the  projects into development or production; increased demand for nuclear  power and uranium and the expected impact on the price of uranium; and  any other activities, events or developments that the companies expect  or anticipate will or may occur in the future.
 
 Forward-looking  statements are necessarily based upon a number of assumptions that,  while considered reasonable by management at the time, are inherently  subject to business, market and economic risks, uncertainties and  contingencies that may cause actual results, performance or achievements  to be materially different from those expressed or implied by  forward-looking statements. Such assumptions include, but are not  limited to, assumptions that IsoEnergy and Toro will complete the  Transaction in accordance with, and on the timeline contemplated by the  terms and conditions of the relevant agreements; that the parties will  receive the required shareholder, regulatory, court and stock exchange  approvals and will satisfy, in a timely manner, the other conditions to  the closing of the Transaction; the accuracy of management's assessment  of the effects of the successful completion of the Transaction and that  the anticipated benefits of the Transaction will be realized; the  anticipated mineralization of IsoEnergy's and Toro's projects being  consistent with expectations and the potential benefits from such  projects and any upside from such projects; the price of uranium;  that general business and economic conditions will not change in a  materially adverse manner; that financing will be available if and when  needed and on reasonable terms; and that third party contractors,  equipment and supplies and governmental and other approvals required to  conduct the Merged Group's planned activities will be available on  reasonable terms and in a timely manner. Although each of IsoEnergy and  Toro have attempted to identify important factors that could cause  actual results to differ materially from those contained in  forward-looking information, there may be other factors that cause  results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended. There can be no  assurance that such information will prove to be accurate, as actual  results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated  in such statements. Accordingly, readers should not place undue  reliance on forward-looking information.
 
 Such statements  represent the current views of IsoEnergy and Toro with respect to future  events and are necessarily based upon a number of assumptions and  estimates that, while considered reasonable by IsoEnergy and Toro, are  inherently subject to significant business, economic, competitive,  political and social risks, contingencies and uncertainties. Risks and  uncertainties include, but are not limited to the following: the  inability of IsoEnergy and Toro to complete the Transaction; a material  adverse change in the timing of and the terms and conditions upon which  the Transaction is completed; the inability to satisfy or waive all  conditions to closing the Transaction; the failure to obtain  shareholder, regulatory, court or stock exchange approvals in connection  with the Transaction; the inability of the Merged Group to realize the  benefits anticipated from the Transaction and the timing to realize such  benefits; the inability of the consolidated entity to realize the  benefits anticipated from the Arrangement and the timing to realize such  benefits, including the exploration and drilling targets described  herein; unanticipated changes in market price for ISO Shares and/or Toro  Shares; changes to IsoEnergy's and/or Toro's current and future  business plans and the strategic alternatives available thereto; growth  prospects and outlook of Toro's business; regulatory determinations and  delays; stock market conditions generally; demand, supply and pricing  for uranium; and general economic and political conditions in Canada,  the United States and other jurisdictions where the applicable party  conducts business. Other factors which could materially affect such  forward-looking information are described with respect to IsoEnergy in  IsoEnergy's annual information form in respect of the year ended  December 31, 2024 and other filings with the securities  regulators  which are available under IsoEnergy's profile on SEDAR+ at    www.sedarplus.ca   and on EDGAR at    www.sec.gov  and with respect to Toro at  www.asx.com.au.  IsoEnergy and Toro do not undertake to update any forward-looking  information, except in accordance with applicable securities laws.
 
 Disclaimer on IsoEnergy Mineral Resource Estimates
 
 For  additional information regarding IsoEnergy's Tony M Mine, including the  current mineral resource estimate, please refer to the Technical Report  entitled "Technical Report on the Tony M Mine, Utah, USA – Report for  NI 43-101" dated effective September 9, 2022 authored by Mr. Mark B.  Mathisen, C.P.G. of SLR Consulting (Canada) Ltd.  (the "Tony M Technical Report") , available under IsoEnergy's profile on  www.sedarplus.ca. Mr. Mathisen is a "qualified person" under NI 43-101.
 
 For  additional information regarding IsoEnergy's Larocque East Project,  including the current mineral resource estimate, please refer to the  Technical Report entitled "Larocque East project, including the mineral  resource estimate, please refer to the Technical Report entitled  "Technical Report on the Larocque East Project, Northern Saskatchewan,  Canada" dated effective July 8, 2022, authored by Mr. Mark B. Mathisen,  C.P.G. of SLR Consulting (Canada) Ltd.  (the "Larocque East Technical Report") , available under IsoEnergy's profile on  www.sedarplus.ca. Mr. Mathisen is a "qualified person" under NI 43-101.
 
 Disclaimer on IsoEnergy Historical Mineral Resource Estimates
 
 Each  of the mineral resource estimates, except for the Larocque East Project  and Tony M, contained in this presentation are considered to be  "historical estimates" as defined under NI 43-101, and have been sourced  as follows:
 
 
 For the Daneros Mine, as disclosed in the above noted technical  report, the historical estimate was prepared by Energy Fuels using a  wireframe model of the mineralized zone based on an outside bound of a  0.05% eu3o8 grade cutoff at a minimum thickness of 1 foot. Surface  drilling would need to be conducted to confirm resources and  connectivity of resources in order to verify the Daneros historical  estimate as a current mineral resource.Daneros Mine: Reported by Energy Fuels Inc. in a technical report  entitled "Updated Report on the Daneros Mine Project, San Juan County,  Utah, U.S.A.", prepared by Douglas C. Peters, C. P. G., of Peters  Geosciences, dated March 2, 2018;Sage Plain Project: Reported by Energy Fuels Inc. in a technical  report entitled "Updated Technical Report on Sage Plain Project  (Including the Calliham Mine)", prepared by Douglas C. Peters, CPG of  Peters Geosciences, dated March 18, 2015;Coles Hill: reported by Virginia Uranium Holdings Inc. In a  technical report entitled "NI43-101 preliminary economic assessment  update (revised)", prepared by John I Kyle of Lyntek Incorporated dated  August 19, 2013;Dieter Lake: Dated 2006 and reported by Fission Energy Corp. In a  company report entitled "Technical Report on the Dieter Lake Property,  Quebec, Canada" dated October 7, 2011;Matoush: Dated December 7, 2012 and reported by Strateco Resources Inc. in a press release dated December 7, 2012;Ben Lomond: Dated as of 1982, and reported by Mega Uranium Ltd. In a  company report entitled "Technical Report on the Mining Leases Covering  the Ben Lomond Uranium-Molybdenum Deposit Queensland, Australia" dated  July 16, 2005.Milo Project: Reported by Gmb Resources Ltd. in a scoping study  entitled "Milo Project Scoping Study" prepared by Peter Owens and Basile  Dean of Mining One Consultants, dated March 6, 2013.
 
 For the Sage Plain  Project, as disclosed in the above noted technical report, the  historical estimate was prepared by Peters Geosciences using a modified  polygonal method. An exploration program would need to be conducted,  including twinning of historical drill holes, in order to verify the  Sage Plain historical estimate as a current mineral resource.
 
 For  the Coles Hill Project, as disclosed in the above noted revised  preliminary economic assessment, the historical estimated was prepared  by John I Kyle of Lyntek Incorporated. Twinning of a selection of  certain holes would need to be completed along with updating of mining,  processing and certain cost estimates in order to verify the Coles Hill  Project historical resource estimate as a current mineral resource  estimate.
 
 For Dieter Lake, as disclosed in the above noted  technical report, the historical estimate was prepared by Davis &  Guo using the Thiessen (Voronoi) polygon method. Data constraints used  were 200 ppm, 500 ppm, and 1000ppm u3o8 over a minimum of 1 metre  thickness. Polygons created had radii of 200 metres. A rock density of  2.67g/cm3 was used. An exploration program would need to be completed,  including twinning of historical drill holes, in order to verify the  Dieter Lake historical estimate as a current mineral resource.
 
 For Matoush, as disclosed in the above noted press release, the historical estimate was prepared by RPA using block U3O8  grades within a wireframe model that were estimated by ordinary  kriging. The historical estimate was estimated at a cut-off grade of  0.1% U3O8 and using an average long-term uranium  price of us$75 per pound. Six zones make up the historical estimate at  Matoush: am-15, mt-34, mt-22, mt-02, mt-06, and mt-36. Each zone is made  up of one or more lenses, most of which strike north (009°) and dip  steeply (87°) to the east. Outlines of the mineralized lenses were  interpreted on ten-metre spaced vertical sections. Minimum criteria of  0.10% U3O8 over 1.5 m true thickness was used as a  guide. An exploration program would need to be conducted, including  twinning of historical drill holes, in order to verify the Matoush  historical estimate as a current mineral resource.
 
 For Ben Lomond,  as disclosed in the above noted technical report, the historical  estimate was prepared by the Australian Atomic Energy Commission (AAEC)  using a sectional method. The parameters used in the selection of the  ore intervals were a minimum true thickness of 0.5 metres and maximum  included waste (true thickness) of 5 metres. Resource zones were  outlined on 25 metre sections using groups of intersections, isolated  intersections were not included. The grades from the composites were  area weighted to give the average grade above a threshold of 500 ppm  uranium. The area was measured on each 25 metres section to give the  tonnage at a bulk density of 2.603. An exploration program would need to  be conducted, including twinning of historical drill holes, in order to  verify the Ben Lomond historical estimate as a current mineral  resource.
 
 For the Milo Project, as disclosed in the above noted  scoping study, the historical estimate was prepared by Peter Owens and  Basile Dean of Mining One Consultants. An exploration program would need  to be conducted, including twinning of a selection of certain holes,  along with updating of mining processing and certain cost estimates in  order to verify the Milo Project historical resource estimate as a  current mineral resource estimate.
 
 In each instance, the  historical estimate is reported using the categories of mineral  resources and mineral reserves as defined by the Canadian Institute CIM  Definition Standards for Mineral Reserves, and mineral reserves at that  time, and these "historical estimates" are not considered by IsoEnergy  to be current. In each instance, the reliability of the historical  estimate is considered reasonable, but a Qualified Person has not done  sufficient work to classify the historical estimate as a current mineral  resource, and neither IsoEnergy nor Toro is treating the historical  estimate as a current mineral resource. The historical information  provides an indication of the exploration potential of the properties  but may not be representative of expected results.
 
 Cautionary Note to United States Investors Regarding Presentation of Mineral Resource Estimates
 
 The  mineral resource estimates included in this press release have been  prepared in accordance with the requirements of the securities laws in  effect in Canada and Australia, as applicable, which differ in certain  material respects from the disclosure requirements promulgated by the  U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC").   Accordingly, information contained in this press release may not be  comparable to similar information made public by U.S. companies  reporting pursuant to SEC disclosure requirements.
 
 Pro forma Mineral Resources
 
 This  announcement refers to IsoEnergy and Toro having a combined pro forma  Mineral Resource estimates of 133.4 Mlbs M&I (+141%) and 39.4 Mlbs  Inferred (+704%), along with historical resources of 154.0 Mlbs M&I  and 88.0 Mlbs Inferred. This is comprised of the individual Mineral  Resource estimates of Toro reported in accordance with the JORC Code  2012 and 2004, and IsoEnergy reported in accordance with NI 43-101.  Refer to the Mineral Resource estimates of each entity, confirmation in  accordance with ASX Listing Rule 5.23 in respect of Toro on page 2 and  page 26), and ASX Listing Rule 5.12 disclosures on behalf of IsoEnergy  on page 11).
 
 Competent person disclosures
 
 The information presented here that relates to U3O8 and V2O5  Mineral Resources of Toro Energy's Centipede-Millipede, Lake Way, Lake  Maitland, Dawson Hinkler and Nowthanna deposits is based on information  compiled by Dr Greg Shirtliff of Toro Energy Limited and Mr Daniel  Guibal of Condor Geostats Services Pty Ltd. Mr Guibal takes overall  responsibility for the Resource Estimate, and Dr Shirtliff takes  responsibility for the integrity of the data supplied for the  estimation. Dr Shirtliff is a Member of the Australasian Institute of  Mining and Metallurgy (AusIMM) and Mr Guibal is a Fellow of the AusIMM  and they have sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of  mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the  activity they are undertaking to qualify as Competent Persons as defined  in the 2012 Edition of the 'Australasian Code for Reporting of  Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves (JORC Code  2012)'. The Competent Persons consent to the inclusion in this release  of the matters based on the information in the form and context in which  it appears.
 
 The information presented here that relates to  Mineral Resources of Toro's Theseus Uranium Project is based on work  supervised by Michael Andrew, who is a member of the Australian  Institute of Mining and Metallurgy of the Australian Institute of  Geoscientists. Mr Andrew is an employee of Snowden Optiro, and has  sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation  and type of deposits under consideration and to the activity he is  undertaking to qualify as a Competent Persons as defined in the 2004  Edition of the 'Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results,  Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves'. Mr Andrew consents to the inclusion  in this release of the matters based on his information in the form and  context in which it appears.
 
 Mineral Resource Estimates of IsoEnergy
 
 
 
 
                      | Project 
 
 | Location 
 
 | Country 
 
 | Category 
 
 | Tonnes (m)
 
 
 | U 3 O 8 grade (%) 
 
 | contained U3O8
 (m lbs)
 
 
 | 
 | V 2 O 5 grade (ppm) 
 
 | contained V2O5
 (m lbs)
 
 
 |          | Hurricane 
 
 | Saskatchewan 
 
 | Canada 
 
 | Indicated 
 
 | 0.1 
 
 | 34.50 % 
 
 | 48.6 
 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 |          | 
 | 
 | 
 | Inferred 
 
 | 0.1 
 
 | 2.20 % 
 
 | 2.7 
 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 |          | Tony M 
 
 | Utah 
 
 | USA 
 
 | Indicated 
 
 | 1.1 
 
 | 0.28 % 
 
 | 6.6 
 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 |          | 
 | 
 | 
 | Inferred 
 
 | 0.4 
 
 | 0.27 % 
 
 | 2.2 
 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 |          | Sage Plain 
 
 | Utah 
 
 | USA 
 
 | Indicated* 
 
 | 0.2 
 
 | 0.16 % 
 
 | 0.8 
 
 | 
 | 1.3 % 
 
 | 6.5 
 
 |          | 
 | 
 | 
 | Inferred* 
 
 | 0.0 
 
 | 0.13 % 
 
 | 0.0 
 
 | 
 | 0.9 % 
 
 | 0.2 
 
 |          | Daneros 
 
 | Utah 
 
 | USA 
 
 | Indicated* 
 
 | 0.0 
 
 | 0.36 % 
 
 | 0.1 
 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 |          | 
 | 
 | 
 | Inferred* 
 
 | 0.0 
 
 | 0.37 % 
 
 | 0.1 
 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 |          | Ben Lomond 
 
 | Queensland 
 
 | Australia 
 
 | Indicated* 
 
 | 1.3 
 
 | 0.28 % 
 
 | 8.1 
 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 |          | 
 | 
 | 
 | Inferred* 
 
 | 0.6 
 
 | 0.21 % 
 
 | 2.8 
 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 |          | Dieter Lake 
 
 | Quebec 
 
 | Canada 
 
 | Inferred* 
 
 | 19.3 
 
 | 0.06 % 
 
 | 24.4 
 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 |          | Milo 
 
 | Queensland 
 
 | Australia 
 
 | Inferred* 
 
 | 88.4 
 
 | 0.01 % 
 
 | 14.0 
 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 |          | Matoush 
 
 | Quebec 
 
 | Canada 
 
 | Indicated* 
 
 | 0.6 
 
 | 0.95 % 
 
 | 12.3 
 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 |          | 
 | 
 | 
 | Inferred* 
 
 | 1.7 
 
 | 0.44 % 
 
 | 16.4 
 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 |          | Coles Hill 
 
 | Virginia 
 
 | USA 
 
 | Indicated* 
 
 | 108.5 
 
 | 0.06 % 
 
 | 132.9 
 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 |          | 
 | 
 | 
 | Inferred* 
 
 | 32.9 
 
 | 0.04 % 
 
 | 30.4 
 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 |          | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 |          | Total M&I - 43-101 
 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 1.1 
 
 | 
 | 55.2 
 
 | 
 | 
 | - 
 
 |          | Total Inferred 43-101 
 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 0.4 
 
 | 
 | 4.9 
 
 | 
 | 
 | - 
 
 |          | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 |          | Total M&I 
 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 111.8 
 
 | 
 | 209.5 
 
 | 
 | 
 | 6.5 
 
 |          | Total Inferred 
 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 143.4 
 
 | 
 | 93.1 
 
 | 
 | 
 | 0.2 
 
 |          | *Includes historical resources 
 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 |          | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 |  
 
 Cautionary statement: The IsoEnergy Mineral Resource  estimates comprise foreign and historical estimates for the purposes of  the ASX Listing Rules. These estimates are not reported in accordance  with the JORC Code. A competent person has not done sufficient work to  classify the historical estimates or foreign estimates as Mineral  Resources or Ore Reserves in accordance with the JORC Code. It is  uncertain that following evaluation and/or further exploration work that  the historical estimates or foreign estimates will be able to be  reported as Mineral Resources or Ore Reserves in accordance with the  JORC Code.
 
 ASX Listing Rule 5.12 disclosures regarding historical and foreign estimates
 
 
 
 
                      | Listing Rule 
 
 | Explanation 
 
 | Commentary 
 
 |          | 5.12.1 
 
 | The source and date of the historical estimates or foreign estimates. 
 
 | Milo: Milo Mineral Resource Statement: 22 November 2012 contained in an ASX Announcement by GBM Resources Ltd (ASX:GBZ). 
 
 |          | Ben Lomond: McKay,  A. D., 1982, Ben Lomond Deposit: In Situ Uranium Resource Estimate.  Confidential Report of the Australian Atomic Energy Commission Uranium  Resource Evaluation Unit. 
 
 
 Vigar,  A & Jones, D. 2005 Technical Report on the Mining Leases Covering  the Ben Lomond Uranium – Molybdenum Deposit Queensland, Australia.  Prepared for Maple Minerals Corporation as a NI-43-101 Report. Available  at ww.sedarplus.ca.
 
 
 |          | Coles Hill: The  Coles Hill Mineral Resources are considered to be historic in nature.  The most recent Mineral Resource estimate was prepared by Lyntek, Inc.  and BRS Engineering in 2013 (Kyle, John I., P. E. and Douglas Beahm,  P.E., P.G., 2013; NI 43-101 Preliminary Economic Assessment Update  (REVISED), Coles Hill Uranium Property, Pittsylvania County, Virginia,  United States of America, and is based upon assay and geologic data  collected by the former owner, Marline Oil Co, who drilled out the  project between 1979 and 1981. All assays and geotechnical data used to  develop the Mineral Resource estimate for the Coles Hill project was  generated from that exploration program. 
 
 |          | Tony M: IsoEnergy's  Tony M mine project has a Mineral Resource estimate that is current  within the context of the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and  Petroleum (CIM) Code for Mineral Reserves and Mineral Resources (CIM  Code). While the CIM Code is a foreign estimate, its classification of  Mineral Resources is similar in most respects to those of the JORC Code. 
 
 |          | Daneros: The  Mineral Resource estimate for the Daneros mine project of IsoEnergy is  considered to be historic in nature. Historical exploration data used in  IsoEnergy's project evaluation was derived from surface rotary and core  holes drilled by Utah Power & Light and White Canyon Uranium  (collectively 603 drill holes), and underground long holes (583 holes)  drilled by Deneson Mines and Energy Fuels. Various Mineral Resource  estimates, all of which are historical in nature and not in compliance  with the JORC Code in 2009 for White Canyon Uranium and Energy Fuels,  Inc. in 2012 and 2018. The data used to prepare those reports was  historical exploration drilling data and geologic information from prior  mining operations. 
 
 |          | Dieter Lake: The  most recent historical, foreign Mineral Resource estimate done for the  Dieter Lake project in Northern Quebec is documented in two reports. The  first is "2005 Exploration at the Dieter Lake Property, Quebec dated  November 3, 2006" by Dahrouge Geological Consulting Ltd. for Strathmore  Minerals Corporation which for the first time describes the new resource  estimate. This estimate, along with an update on exploration activity  from 2007 to 2011, was repeated in "Technical Report on the Dieter Lake  Property, Quebec, Canada" dated October 7, 2011", prepared GeoVector  Management Inc. for Fission Energy Corp (www.sedarplus.ca). Clinton  Davis was an author on both reports. Michael Guo did the 2005 modelling  and was a co-author on the 2006 report. Prior to the 2005 estimate,  historical resource estimates had been completed in 1981, 1989, and  2004. 
 Davis,  C. & Guo, M. (2006). 2005 Exploration at the Dieter Lake Property,  Quebec; NI 43-101 Report for Strathmore Minerals Corp, 28 p., with  appendices.
 
 
 
 Davis,  C.F, (2011), Fission Energy Corp, Technical Report on the Dieter Lake  Property, Quebec, Canada, NI43-101 Report for Fission Energy Corp, 47  p., with appendices (www.sedarplus.ca).
 
 
 |          | Sage Plain: Mineral  resources for IsoEnergy's Sage Plain project were estimated by an  independent contractor to the project's then current owner, Energy  Fuels, Inc. and reported in the "Updated Technical Report on Sage Plain  Project (including the Calliham Mine)" dated March 18, 2015 and authored  by Douglas C. Peters, CPG of Peters Geosciences. The Technical Report  follows the format of NI 43-101, but the author did not identify any  Mineral Reserve and Mineral Resource code used to classify the  mineralization. Resources were estimated by employing a polygonal  method. IsoEnergy considers the Sage Plain resources to be historic in  nature. 
 
 |          | Matoush: The  most recent historical, foreign Mineral Resource estimate is documented  in "Technical Report on the Mineral Resource Update for the Matoush  Project, Central Québec, Canada, NI43-101 Report" dated February 15,  2012, prepared by David A. Ross, R. Barry Cook, Normand L. Lecuyer, and  Bruce Fielder (Melis Engineering Ltd.) of Roscoe Postle Associates Inc.  ("RPA") for Strateco Resources Inc. This report is available on  www.sedarplus.ca. The historical, foreign Mineral Resource estimate was  further updated by RPA in December 2012, as disclosed in a press release  of Strateco dated December 7, 2012, and in Strateco Resources' Annual  Information For, dated March 21, 2013 (available on www.sedarplus.ca).  RPA updated the Mineral Resource estimate for the Matoush project based  on drill results available as at November 22, 2012. 
 
 |          | Hurricane: The  most recent foreign Mineral Resource estimate is documented in  "Technical Report on the Larocque East Project, Northern Saskatchewan,  Canada" for IsoEnergy Ltd. This report was prepared by Mark B. Mathisen  of SLR Consulting (Canada) Ltd. ("SLR"). Two versions, both with an  effective date of July 8, 2022, are available at www.sedarplus.ca - one  with a signature date of July 12, 2022, and an amended version with a  signature date of August 4, 2022. It is explained in the amended report  that this Technical Report conforms to NI 43-101 Standards of Disclosure  for Mineral Projects and replaces the technical report filed on SEDAR  on July 19, 2022, which has been revised to correct the typographical  error related to the Indicated U3O8 grades in Table 14-11, which  summarizes the block model sensitivity to cut-off grade. Additional  typographical errors have been corrected to align the descriptions of  historical drilling in Section 6 with Table 10-1. The recommended work  plan has been revised. 
 
 |          | 5.12.2 
 
 | Whether  the historical estimates or foreign estimates use categories of  mineralisation other than those defined in Appendix 5A (JORC Code) and  if so, an explanation of the differences. 
 
 | Milo: The Inferred resource was calculated in accordance with JORC 2004. 
 
 |          | Ben Lomond: The Inferred resource used JORC terminology of the time (1982). 
 
 |          | Coles Hill: Estimates  of Mineral Resources for the Coles Hill project were prepared in  accordance with Canadian National Instrument 43-101 and CIM standards  that were in effect at the time that the resource estimate was prepared  (2013). The estimate predates the current CIM Standards and CIM  Estimation of Mineral Resources & Mineral Reserves Best Practices  Guidelines, which became effective in November, 2019. IsoEnergy  considers the Coles Hill resources to be historical in nature. The use  of "Inferred Mineral Resources" and "Indicated Mineral Resources" follow  the requirements of the CIM Code. The definitions of such  classifications ("Inferred Mineral Resources" and "Indicated Mineral  Resources") are similar to those classifications under the JORC Code,  and there are no differences in the definitions of "Inferred Mineral  Resources" and "Indicated Mineral Resources" between the two Codes. 
 
 |          | Tony M: The  "current" Mineral Resource estimate for the Tony M project was prepared  in compliance with the CIM Definition Standards for Mineral Resources  & Mineral Reserves (2014), CIM Uranium Leading Practice Guidelines  (2024) and Canadian National Instrument 43-101. The definitions of  Mineral Resource classifications for "Indicated Mineral Resources" and  "Inferred Mineral Resources" under the CIM Code are similar to the JORC  Code definitions of "Inferred Mineral Resources" and "Indicated Mineral  Resources". 
 
 |          | Daneros: Mineral  resources for the Daneros Mine project were estimated for former  project owner Energy Fuels, Inc. by Douglas C. Peters, CPG and this  estimate is contained within the "Updated Report On The Daneros Mine  Project, San Juan County, Utah, U. S. A." dated March 2, 2018. Although  the resource is considered to be historic, the estimate uses resource  classifications that are the same as those of the JORC Code. 
 
 |          | Dieter Lake: The  Davis and Guo (2006) report and contained Mineral Resource estimate  predate the current CIM Standards (May 2014) and CIM Estimation of  Mineral Resources & Mineral Reserves Best Practices Guidelines  (November 2019), and for IsoEnergy the Mineral Resources are a  historical estimate under National Instrument 43-101 – Standards of  Disclosure for Mineral Projects ("NI 43-101") and a qualified person has  not done sufficient work to classify the historical estimate as current  Mineral Resources. It is uncertain whether the Inferred resources in  the 2006 report would qualify as Inferred resources under JORC  standards. 
 
 |          | Sage Plain: Resources  estimated and reported in the 2015 Technical Report on the Sage Plain  Project" are historical in nature do not appear to be consistent with  Mineral Resource codes in effect at the time of the report. 
 
 |          | Matoush: The  Ross et al (2012) report and contained Mineral Resource estimate, and  the historical, foreign Mineral Resource update in the March 21, 2013  Strateco Resources Annual Information Form predate the current CIM  Standards (May 2014) and CIM Estimation of Mineral Resources &  Mineral Reserves Best Practices Guidelines (November 2019), and for  IsoEnergy the Mineral Resources are a historical estimate under National  Instrument 43-101 – Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects ("NI  43-101") and a Competent Person has not done sufficient work to classify  the historical estimate as current Mineral Resources. It is uncertain  whether the Inferred and Indicated resources in the 2012 report would  qualify as Inferred resources under JORC (2012) standards. 
 
 |          | Hurricane: The  Mathison (2022) report conforms to NI 43-101 Standards of Disclosure  for mineral projects. Foreign mineral resources were classified in  accordance with definitions for mineral resources in the Canadian  Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM) Definition Standards  for Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves dated May 10, 2014. The  definitions of Mineral Resource classifications for "Indicated Mineral  Resources" and "Inferred Mineral Resources" under the CIM Code are  similar to the JORC Code definitions of "Indicated Mineral Resources"  and "Inferred Mineral Resources". 
 
 |          | 5.12.3 
 
 | The relevance and materiality of the historical estimates or foreign estimates to the entity. 
 
 | Milo, Ben Lomond, Daneros, Dieter Lake, Sage Plain, Matoush, Coles Hill: The estimate is considered relevant however not material in the context of global uranium resources held. 
 
 |          | Tony M: The  Tony M project Mineral Resources are "current" under the CIM Code and  are not "historic" in nature. As such they are relevant and are material  to IsoEnergy. 
 
 |          | Hurricane: The Mathisen (2022) foreign Mineral Resource estimate, is considered to be both relevant and material to IsoEnergy. 
 
 |          | 5.12.4 
 
 | The  reliability of historical estimates or foreign estimates, including by  reference to any of the criteria in Table 1 of Appendix 5A (JORC Code)  which are relevant to understanding the reliability of the historical  estimates or foreign estimates. 
 
 | Milo: The  estimates would require some additional work to conform to JORC 2012  however the methodologies for preparing the resource estimates have not  changed significantly in comparison to previous reporting. 
 
 |          | Ben Lomond: The  estimate is indicative of the mineralisation present however  substantial re-drilling and assaying, down hole surveys and radiometric  logging etc would be required to provide a JORC 2012 resource estimate. 
 
 |          | Coles Hill: Although  the Coles Hill resource estimate is considered to be an accurate and  relevant representation of the nature of the uranium mineralization at  the project, additional work, as per the recommendations in the  technical report, will be required for the resources to be reclassified  as "current" under the CIM Code and the CIM Uranium Leading Practice  Guidelines (2024). The existing resource estimate was prepared in  accordance with the then-prevailing NI 43-101 and CIM standards,  although the drill hole data that forms the basis of the resource  estimate had not been confirmed at the time the estimate was prepared.  While this estimate predates the current CIM Standards (2014) and CIM  Estimation of Mineral Resources & Mineral Reserves Best Practices  Guidelines (November, 2019), the methodologies for preparing and  evaluating the resource estimates have not changed significantly in  comparison to those in effect at the time of the most recent estimate  (2013). The historical Mineral Resources are considered to be reliable. 
 
 |          | Tony M: The  Tony M resources are relevant and reliable in the context of evaluating  the project. The resources are "current" and are not historical in  nature. 
 
 |          | Daneros: Resources  at the Daneros mine are not "current" and are historic in nature.  However, they may be relevant to the evaluation of the project and its  exploration potential in the future. 
 
 |          | Dieter Lake: The  historical, foreign, Inferred resources presented in both the Davis and  Guo (2006) and Davis (2011) reports predate the current CIM Standards  (May 2014) and CIM Estimation of Mineral Resources & Mineral  Reserves Best Practices Guidelines (November 2019), and for IsoEnergy  the Inferred resources are a historical estimate under National  Instrument 43-101 – Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects ("NI  43-101") and a Competent Person has not done sufficient work to classify  the historical estimate as current Mineral Resources. Until this work  is done, the reliability of the historical Dieter Lake resource estimate  is uncertain. 
 
 |          | Sage Plain: The  methodology for resource estimation used for the Sage Plain project is  consistent with historical work throughout the central Colorado Plateau  uranium region. Polygonal estimation methodology, and the classification  of resources and/or reserves derived from such studies have served  small underground uranium mining adequately for decades. While local  miners are familiar with the classifications and methodologies, they are  not appropriate or reliable for IsoEnergy. 
 
 |          | Matoush: The  Ross et al (2012) report and contained Mineral Resource estimate, and  the historical, foreign Mineral Resource update in the March 21, 2013  Strateco Resources Annual Information Form predate the current CIM  Standards (May 2014) and CIM Estimation of Mineral Resources &  Mineral Reserves Best Practices Guidelines (November 2019), and for  IsoEnergy the Mineral Resources are a historical estimate under National  Instrument 43-101 – Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects ("NI  43-101") and a Competent Person has not done sufficient work to classify  the historical, foreign estimate as current Mineral Resources. Until  this work is done, the reliability of the historical, foreign Mineral  Resource estimate is uncertain, and it is uncertain whether the Inferred  and Indicated resources in the 2012 report would qualify as Inferred  and Indicated resources under JORC (2012) standards. 
 
 |          | Hurricane: The  Mathison (2022) report conforms to NI 43-101 Standards of Disclosure  for mineral projects. Foreign Mineral Resources were classified in  accordance with definitions for Mineral Resources in the Canadian  Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM) Definition Standards  for Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves dated May 10, 2014 current  CIM Standards (May 2014), and IsoEnergy reports the Mineral Resources as  a compliant estimate under National Instrument 43-101 – Standards of  Disclosure for Mineral Projects ("NI 43-101"). 
 
 |          | 5.12.5 
 
 | To  the extent known, a summary of work programs on which the historical  estimates or foreign estimates are based and a summary of the key  assumptions, mining and processing parameters and methods used to  prepare the historical or foreign estimates. 
 
 | Milo: 
 The  most recent JORC 2004 Mineral Resource estimate was completed for the  Milo Project by Kerrin Allwood F.AusIMM and published as a JORC 2004  Resource in 2012 (Allwood.K , Nov, 2012). The Nov, 2012 historical JORC  2004 Resource estimate was calculated for co-incident TREEYO & P2O5  and a copper equivalent resource comprising Au, Ag, Cu, Mo, Co & U.  The Milo JORC 2004 estimate block model was generated from 34 drillholes  and 9878 samples with a total core length of 11572m, all of which were  competed by GBM Resources Ltd (ASX:GBZ) from 2009 to 2012.
 
 Detailed  summaries of the GBM Resources Ltd drill programs completed from 2009  to 2012 are covered in Allwood & Norris (Feb, 2012), Allwood &  Norris . (August, 2012), and Allwood & Norris (Nov, 2012). The  objective of diamond drill programs from 2009 to 2012 was to verify and  test the Milo deposit ( 22 drillholes, 3696 samples ) (, Allwood &  Norris Feb, 2012), identify anomalous intersections in the Milo deposit  for follow up drilling Allwood & Norris . (August, 2012), 31  drillholes for 11464m of drilling and complete a further 3 drillholes to  complete the Inferred resource for an initial Scoping Study Allwood  & Norris ( Nov, 2012), 34 drillholes, 11572m, 3503 RC, 8069 DD.  9878m sampled at largely 1m intervals.
 
 
 |          | Ben Lomond: 
 In  total 73,151 m of drilling was completed with 63,292 available for the  quatoed estimate. ( detailed below ). All holes were radiometrically  logged. The data was digitised so that computer analysis including the  restitution of logs and the estimation of resources, could be carried  out at various cut-off grades.
 
 
 Chemical  analyses of the core gave the required control for the radiometric  equivalent-grade calculations, by defining the equilibrium ratio between  radiometric grade and the actual grade as determined by analysis.  Extensive documentation exists on the calibration of the various  spectrometers used during the drilling campaigns and a different  calibration factor is used for each. The actual uranium values used are  therefore a combination of actual assays and down-hole spectrometer  probe readings. Correlation overall is good and discrepancies minor  (McKay 1982).
 
 
 The  parameters used in the selection of the ore intervals were a minimum  true thickness of 0.5 metres and maximum included waste (true thickness)  of 5 metres. Resource zones were outlined on 25m sections using groups  of intersections, isolated intersections were not included. The grades  from the composites were area weighted to give the average grade above a  threshold of 500 ppm uranium. The area was measured on each 25m section  to give the tonnage at a bulk density of 2.603
 
 
 The resource categories were chosen based on the Australian JORC code guidelines of the time. The categories were:
 •  Indicated -- extend up to 5 metres from a drill-hole up or down dip, or  half the distance to the next drill-hole if less than 5 metres.
 •  Inferred - extend 5 to 15 metres from a drill-hole up or down dip, or  half the distance to the next drill-hole if between 5 and 15  metres.
 
 
 
 Drilling 1975-1981
 No. of Holes         Metres
 Diamond Core Surface                   98                   19,459
 
 Underground                                   30                   2,797
 Percussion  Surface                        201                 28,915
 Underground                                77                    2,582
 Air Trac    Surface                         230                  9,539
 SUB-TOTAL:                                   636                  63,292
 
 
 
 1982-1984:
 No. of holes   Metres
 Diamond core
 Surface                                          21                     4,895
 
 Percussion
 Surface                                          43                     4,964
 
 GRAND TOTAL:                            700                   73,151
 
 
 |          | Coles Hill: 
 The  Coles Hill uranium deposits were discovered by Marline Oil in 1979 and  1980. Marline conducted a large-scale core drilling program to test  their previously identified geophysical, radiometric, and geochemical  anomalies at the project site, and this work resulted in the initial  definition of the Coles Hill North and South uranium deposits. The  Marline core drilling program extended into 1981, and the data generated  from that drilling program has served as the basis for all subsequent  resource estimations. In 1982 Union Carbide Corporation (later known as  Umetco) entered into a joint venture with Marline with the objective of  preparing a feasibility study that would lead to the development of the  Coles Hill uranium deposits and advance the project to a production  status. Mineral resource estimates for the project that are considered  to be relevant to the project were prepared utilizing the radiometric  and chemical assays derived from the 1979-1981 drilling program of 263  core holes, as well as 3 core holes drilled at the property in 2008. The  fundamental assay and geological data for the project was preserved,  and a significant portion of the core was stored in covered facilities.  Comparison of historical assay data with "check" assays from sampling  programs in 2008 and 2013 generally confirmed the validity of the  historical data. The Mineral Resource estimate for the project were  estimated by BRS Engineering, a Wyoming-based independent minerals  exploration and engineering company that has extensive experience in the  evaluation of uranium projects. BRS employed radiometric assay data  from 264 drill holes to develop the estimate of Mineral Resources at  Coles Hill. Drill hole assay data was compiled in Datamine software at  an interval of 0.50 feet within a "mineralized envelope" of 0.02% eU3O8  to constrain grade interpolation. A sample composite of 1.0 feet was  selected.
 
 
 
 The  kriging methodology employed optimum block sizes and the optimum number  of samples to access in the estimate were determined by a number of  test runs on strategically placed blocks in high density and low-density  areas in each area. The optimum parameters were determined by observing  what produced the best regression slope (R) and kriging efficiency, and  the lowest spread in 90% confidence limits, but still retaining the  smallest block size relating to the probable future smallest mining unit  ("SMU"). These three parameters produced good correlations amongst  themselves. Three separate searches were affected, namely 1 times the  range of the variogram, 1.5 times the range of the variogram and 2 times  the range of the variogram. For the North Coles a minimum of 17 samples  and a maximum of 25 samples were deemed to be geostatistically  appropriate for the first two searches. The 3rd search was set at a  minimum of 8 samples and a maximum of 25 samples. For the South Coles a  minimum of 10 samples and a maximum of 20 samples for the first two  searches and for the 3rd a minimum of 8 samples and a maximum of 20  samples were deemed to be appropriate (Figures 19 and 21). The search  was confined to a specific layer due to the vertical variability of the  mineralization and therefore the octant search method was deemed  unnecessary. A draft NI 43-101 Preliminary Economic Assessment date  (Revised) on the Coles Hill project was prepared for former owner  Virginia Energy in 2013 by John Kyle of Lyntek, Inc. and Douglas Beahm,  principal Engineer of BRS Engineering, Inc. This study, which is not  publicly available, includes data verification information for all of  the drill hole information, including assays, as well as summaries of  metallurgical testing undertaken by Umetco Minerals, proposed mining  methods, metallurgical recovery methods, and proposed project  infrastructure. Copies of this report are in IsoEnergy's files. This  study of the Coles Hill project included data on mining and mineral  processing methodologies in sufficient detail to identify cut-off grade  criteria for estimation of Mineral Resources.
 
 
 |          | Tony M: 
 The  Tony M uranium deposit and several other similar and nearby deposits  were discovered in a remote part of southeast Utah in the mid 1970s by  Plateau Resources, a subsidiary of a midwestern US electrical utility  company. Plateau's discovery was made through wide-spaced exploration  drilling in an area of several very small-scale underground mines. The  newly discovered deposits were outlined by conventional "open hole"  rotary drilling and "spot "coring of potentially economic mineralization  within favorable flat lying sandstones. Plateau commenced with the  development of a large-scale room and pillar underground mine in 1978.  There was limited uranium production from Tony M prior to its shut-down  in 1984, but production was restarted for a short period of time in  2007-2008, before being shut down again due to low commodity prices.  From the time of discovery to shut-down of mining operations at Tony M a  considerable amount of drill data from surface drilling and underground  long-hole drilling was collected, and that data, as well as mine  operational data and metallurgical recovery information provided a  substantial foundation for a new Mineral Resource estimate that was  prepared in 2022 by SLR International Corporation. and these data  conform to Canadian National Instrument 43-101 Standards of Disclosure  for Mineral Projects. The report, entitled "Technical Report on the Tony  M Mine, Utah, USA Report for NI 43-101" is dated September 9, 2022, and  can be viewed via IsoEnergy's profile on the SEDAR Plus web site  (accessed 8/11/2025). The resource estimate was based upon the results  of 1,678 vertical conventional ("open hole") rotary drill holes,  totalling 947,610 feet. One thousand six hundred seventy of the drill  holes were completed by former owner of the Tony M mine Plateau  Resources and the remainder (eight) were completed by IsoEnergy. The  eight IsoEnergy holes were drilled as offsets to holes previously  drilled by Plateau in order to confirm the results of the historical  drill holes. The holes drilled by IsoEnergy included 2,555 feet of  "conventional" open hole rotary drilling and 439 feet of core. All holes  were vertical in orientation. Mineral resources at the Tony M project  were classified in accordance with the Canadian Institute of Mining,  Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM) Definition Standards for Mineral  Resources and Mineral Reserves, dated May 10, 2014, definitions which  are incorporated by reference in NI 43-101.
 
 SLR  estimated the resources using a conventional block modelling approach  utilizing the inverse squared (ID2) methodology and length-weighted 1.0-  foot uncapped composites to estimate the uranium grades (% eU3O8) in a  three-pass approach. The resource estimate was based upon a US$65 per  pound uranium price, and a cut-off grade oof 0.14% eU3O8. IsoEnergy is  in possession of all of the technical data used to prepare the current  Mineral Resource estimate.
 
 
 |          | Daneros: The  Daneros mine project has been the site for numerous exploration and  development activities since the early 1950s. Much of the data from  those efforts has been lost or is not accessible to IsoEnergy. Recent  mine production and exploration undertaken by IsoEnergy has provided  data for evaluation of the project and exploration planning but is not  complete enough for a new resource estimate or for updated mine  planning. 
 
 |          | Dieter Lake: Based  on the Davis and Guo (2006) and Davis (2011) reports, the 2006  historical, foreign Mineral Resource estimate, which is repeated in the  2011 report, used both 2005 drill core resampling data and historic data  from 96 drill holes. Resource modelling was also updated in 2005 as  part of the evaluation of the data collected during the 2005 exploration  program and compared to the existing historical resource model. This  estimate used 200 m radius polygons, a minimum cutoff of 200 ppm over 1  metre, and a density of 2.67g/cm3. 
 
 |          | Sage Plain: Records  of exploration results and uranium production from the Sage Plain  project area are generally limited to borehole gamma-ray logs, and drill  hole maps of programs carried out periodically, and they have served as  the basis for the historical estimates. The historic resource estimates  for the Sage Plain project were generally calculated using either a  polygonal or circle-tangent modelling method, both of which have been  superseded by more applicable geostatistical resource estimation  methods. Summaries of historical exploration and mining activities at  the Sage Plain project are not available to IsoEnergy. The historical  resource estimates do not conform to either the current JORC Code or the  CIM Code. 
 
 |          | Matoush: The  Ross et al (2012) historical, foreign Mineral Resource estimate in the  NI43-101 report dated February 15, 2012 for Strateco Resources utilized  drill hole data available as of December 31, 2011 when the Matoush  Gemcom database included 515 diamond core holes up to and including hole  MT-11-039. Of these, 392 holes representing 175,190 m of drilling are  located within the area of resources. The wireframe models representing  the mineralized zones are intersected by 150 drill holes. As of December  31, 2011, chemical analyses for all holes had been received. Equivalent  U3O8 (eU3O8) values were not used for this resource estimate, as was  done in previous resource estimates. A set of cross-sections and plan  views were used to construct three-dimensional wireframe models at a  cut-off grade of 0.1% U3O8. High-grade values were cut to 9% U3O8 prior  to compositing. Outlines of the mineralized lenses were interpreted on  ten-metre spaced vertical sections. Minimum criteria of 0.1% U3O8 over  1.5 m true thickness was used as a guide. Narrow intercepts grading  0.05% to 0.1% U3O8 located adjacent to the main mineralized intercept  were included. Where necessary, the wireframe intercept was "bulked out"  to a minimum of 1.5 m true thickness. Low-grade intercepts were  included in the initial wireframe models for zones MT-34 and MT-22. Many  of these intercepts were removed by clipping the resource wireframe if  below 0.1% U3O8. Some intersections grading 0.05% to 0.1% U3O8 were  included in the grade interpolation to preserve continuity and/or  maintain a soft boundary. Variogram parameters were interpreted from  two-metre composited values. Sample intervals within the wireframe  models range from ten centimetres to five metres, and average 70 cm.  Assays within the wireframe models were composited to two-metre lengths  starting at the first mineralized wireframe boundary from the collar and  resetting at each new lens wireframe boundary. Several shorter  composites occur at the bottom of the mineralized zone, immediately  above where the drill hole exits the wireframe. Partial composites less  than 60 cm long were removed from the dataset. Non-assayed intervals  were treated as zero grade. Block U3O8 grades within the wireframe  models were estimated by ordinary kriging. For density, RPA reviewed  results of 945 bulk density measurements made by Strateco technicians  using the water immersion method. RPA concluded that smaller samples may  have poor accuracy and precision, and therefore elected to use only  samples weighing greater than 450 g to calculate the average density of  mineralization at 2.6 t/m3. This factor was then used to convert  resource volumes to a tonnage. RPA manually classified the Mineral  Resources based on drill hole spacing, geology, lens thickness,  continuity, and variogram ranges. Most areas of Indicated are supported  by 30 m to 40 m drill hole spacing, with some exceptions in areas of  thicker and more continuous mineralization where drill hole spacing up  to 50 m was included. The drill hole spacing in the AM-15 zone is  generally less than 20 m. The MT-34 (Main lens), South lens, and most of  the North Lens were classified as Indicated. Although there are some  areas of closely spaced drilling in the upper MT-34 (part of AM-15 zone)  and South lenses, no blocks were classified as measured because grade  and geometrical continuity has not been established to the confidence  level required for the measured category. 
 
 
 Several  shorter composites occur at the bottom of the mineralized zone,  immediately above where the drill hole exits the wireframe. Partial  composites less than 60 cm long were removed from the dataset.  Non-assayed intervals were treated as zero grade. Block U3O8 grades  within the wireframe models were estimated by ordinary kriging. For  density, RPA reviewed results of 945 bulk density measurements made by  Strateco technicians using the water immersion method. RPA concluded  that smaller samples may have poor accuracy and precision and therefore  elected to use only samples weighing greater than 450 g to calculate the  average density of mineralization at 2.6 t/m3. This factor was then  used to convert resource volumes to a tonnage. RPA manually classified  the Mineral Resources based on drill hole spacing, geology, lens  thickness, continuity, and variogram ranges. Most areas of Indicated are  supported by 30 m to 40 m drill hole spacing, with some exceptions in  areas of thicker and more continuous mineralization where drill hole  spacing up to 50 m was included. The drill hole spacing in the AM-15  zone is generally less than 20 m. The MT-34 (Main lens), South lens, and  most of the North Lens were classified as Indicated. Although there are  some areas of closely spaced drilling in the upper MT-34 (part of AM-15  zone) and South lenses, no blocks were classified as measured because  grade and geometrical continuity has not been established to the  confidence level required for the measured category.
 
 
 
 In  2012, Strateco Resources carried out an additional 15,000-metres  drilling, including some 11,000 metres of definition drilling aimed at  outlining the Indicated resource within the boundaries of the new  Inferred resource zones. On December 7, 2012, the Strateco Resources  announced the results of the latest Matoush project historical, foreign  Mineral Resource update by RPA, which showed that the Indicated Mineral  Resource had increased since the previous resource estimate, dated  February 15, 2012. The update was based on drill results available as of  November 22, 2012 and was also published in their March 21, 2013 Annual  Information Form which is available on www.sedarplus.ca
 
 
 |          | Hurricane: The  cut-off date of the Mineral Resource database is March 22, 2022, which  represents the date in which all assays were received from IsoEnergy's  Winter 2022 drill program. The Hurricane resource database, dated March  22, 2022, includes drill hole collar locations (including dip and  azimuth), assay, alteration, geochemical, and lithology data from 106  drill holes totalling 37,875.3 m of drilling completed from 1983 through  spring of 2022. A total of 785 samples of the 1,504 in the database  were contained within the mineralized uranium wireframes. The wireframe  models representing the Hurricane low-grade (LG), medium-grade (MG) and  high-Grade (HG) mineralized zones are intersected by 48 of 106 drill  holes. Geological interpretations supporting the estimate were generated  by SLR and reviewed by IsoEnergy personnel. Wireframe models of  mineralized zones were used to constrain the block model grade  interpolation process. The models represent grade envelopes using the  geological interpretation described above as guidance. 
 The  wireframes consisted of a LG domain using a nominal COG of 0.05% U3O8  and a minimum core length of one metre. SLR considers the selection of  0.05% U3O8 to be appropriate for construction of mineralized wireframe  outlines, as this value reflects the lowest COG that is expected to be  applied for reporting of the Mineral Resources in an underground  operating scenario and is consistent with other known deposits in the  Athabasca Basin. Sample intervals with assay results less than the  nominated COG were included within the mineralized wireframes if the  core length was less than two metres or allowed for modelling of grade  continuity. Wireframes of the MG and HG domains were created using a  grade intercept limit equal to or greater than one metre with a minimum  grade of 5% U3O8 and 25% U3O8, respectively, although lower grades were  incorporated in places to maintain continuity and to meet a minimum  thickness of one metre.
 
 
 
 Uranium  outliers were capped at 5% U3O8 and 20% U3O8 within the LG and MG  domains, resulting in a total of 10 capped assay values. No capping was  applied to the HG domain. SLR's QP chose to limit the influence of the  higher grade composites by employing spatial restriction in the High  Grade domain. SLR used the Leapfrog restrictive search tool "clamp" that  reduces the high value to a threshold value once the maximum distance  is reached rather than discarding the high grade composite completely.  The maximum distance of influence was set to 15 m x 15 m x 1.5 m with a  grade x density threshold value of 250 (approximately equivalent to 55%  U3O8) in both estimation passes. Composites were created from the  capped, raw assay values using the downhole compositing function of  Seequent Leapfrog Geo modelling software package. The composite lengths  used during interpolation were chosen considering the predominant  sampling length, the minimum mining width, style of mineralization, and  continuity of grade, and ranged from 0.5 m to 3.0 m within the wireframe  models, with 97.2% of the samples taken at 0.5 m intervals. Given this  distribution, and considering the width of the mineralization, the SLR  QP chose to composite to one metre lengths. Assays within the wireframe  domains were composited starting at the first mineralized wireframe  boundary from the collar and resetting at each new wireframe boundary.  Assays were capped prior to compositing. A small number of unsampled and  missing sample intervals were ignored. Residual composites were  maintained in the dataset.
 
 
 
 SLR  generated downhole, omni-directional, and directional variograms using  the one metre U3O8 composite values located within the LG and MG  mineralized domains. The MG domain variogram was calculated using  composites located within MG and HG wireframes to allow for more pairs  in the analysis. The variograms were used to support search ellipsoid  anisotropy, linear trends observed in the data, and Mineral Resource  classification decisions. The downhole variograms suggests a relative  nugget effect of approximately 10%. Long range directional variograms  were focused in the primary plane of mineralization, which commonly  strikes northeast and horizontally across the strike direction. Most  ranges were interpreted to be 27 m to 35 m. The uranium grade was used  to estimate the density of each sample with the polynomial formula.  Densities were then interpolated into the block model to convert  mineralized volumes to tonnage and were also used to weight the uranium  grades interpolated into each block. All modelling work was carried out  using Leapfrog Edge version 2021.2.4 software. The Hurricane block model  has 5 m x 2 m x 1 m whole blocks. A regularized whole block approach  was used whereby the block was assigned to the domain where its centroid  was located. The variables Grade, Density, and Grade x Density were  interpolated for U3O8 using the inverse distance cubed (ID3)  methodology. Estimation of grades was controlled by mineralized  wireframe zones. In order to reproduce the direction of the thin,  folded, and faulted domains, SLR employed a variable orientation tool in  Leapfrog Edge. The tool allows the search to be locally adjusted to the  orientation of the mineralization, which results in improved local  grade estimates. SLR used the hanging wall and footwall of each domain  to guide the variable direction search.
 
 
 
 Hard  boundaries were used to limit the use of composites between different  mineralization domains for U3O8 interpolation. SLR validated the block  model using the following methods:
 
 •          Swath plots of composite grades versus ID3, ordinary kriging (OK), and  nearest neighbour (NN) grades in the X, Y, and Z
 
 •         Volumetric comparison of blocks versus wireframes
 
 •         Visual Inspection of block versus composite grades on plan, vertical, and long section
 
 •         Statistical comparison of block grades with assay and composite grades
 
 SLR  found grade continuity to be reasonable and confirmed that the block  grades were reasonably consistent with local drill hole composite  grades.
 
 A  review of other uranium development projects and operating mines in the  Athabasca Basin was undertaken to ascertain certain operating parameters  as they relate to the estimate of a cut-off grade (COG).
 
 The following assumptions were used in the development of the COG for Hurricane:
 
 •          Hurricane would be developed using remote mining extraction methods  similar to other development projects or operating mines in the  Athabasca Basin.
 
 •         Metallurgical recovery is assumed to be similar to other past and present uranium mines in the Athabasca Basin.
 
 •         The long-term U3O8 price is assumed to be US$65/lb U3O8, and the exchange rate is assumed to be C$/US$ = 0.75.
 
 •         Provincial revenue royalties are based on guidelines published by the Saskatchewan government.
 
 •         Operating costs would be representative of a remote mining extraction method.
 
 Applying these factors resulted in a COG of 1.00% U3O8.
 
 Classification  of Mineral Resources as defined in Canadian Institute of Mining,  Metallurgy and Petroleum definition Standards for Mineral Resources and  Mineral Reserves (CIM 2014) were followed for classification of Mineral  Resources.
 
 The  SLR QP has considered the following factors that can affect the  uncertainty associated with each classification of Mineral Resources:  reliability of sampling data, confidence in interpretation and modelling  of geological and estimation domains, and confidence in block grade  estimates. The SLR QP offers the following conclusions related to each  of these factors:
 
 •         Reliability of sampling data:
 
 o    Drilling, sampling, sample preparation, and assay procedures follow industry standards.
 
 o    Data verification and validation work confirm drill hole sample databases are reliable.
 
 o    No significant biases were observed in the QA/QC analysis results.
 
 •         Confidence in interpretation and modelling of geological and estimation domains:
 
 o     Mineralization domains are interpreted manually in cross-sections and  refined in longitudinal sections by an experienced resource geologist.
 
 o    There is good agreement between the drill holes and mineralization wireframe shapes
 
 o    The mineralization wireframe shapes are well defined by sample data in areas classified as Indicated.
 
 •         Confidence in block grade estimates:
 
 o    Indicated block grades correlate well, spatially and statistically, with composite data, both locally and globally.
 
 Blocks  were classified as Indicated or Inferred based on drill hole spacing,  confidence in the geological interpretation, and apparent continuity of  mineralization. All the blocks within the HG domains and blocks within  the MG domain with apparent grade continuity from two or more holes were  classified as Indicated. For the LG grade domain, blocks that did not  meet the criteria of grade x thickness (GT) greater than or equal to  1.0%*m were removed from the Mineral Resource reporting. All remaining  blocks within the MG and LG domains were assigned an Inferred category.
 
 
 |          | 5.12.6 
 
 | Any more recent estimates or data relevant to the reported mineralisation available to the entity. 
 
 | Milo, Ben Lomond, Coles Hill, Tony M, Daneros, Dieter Lake, Sage Plain, Matoush, Hurricane: No more recent estimates have been completed or data relevant to the reported mineralisation is available. 
 
 
 Additional  technical information, derived primarily from exploration drilling, is  limited in scope and has no impact upon the Mineral Resource estimates.
 
 
 |          | 5.12.7 
 
 | The  evaluation and/or exploration work that needs to be completed to verify  the historical estimates or foreign estimates as Mineral Resources or  Ore Reserves in accordance with Listing Rules Appendix 5A (JORC Code). 
 
 | For  all projects, it is noted that IsoEnergy is not required to disclose  its Mineral Resources or Ore Reserve estimates in accordance with the  JORC Code, as it is a Canadian entity and is not admitted to the  official list of ASX. Accordingly, there is no present intention to  undertake work for the purposes of reporting IsoEnergy's Mineral  Resource estimates in accordance with the JORC Code. 
 
 |          | Milo: The  data would require review and preparation of a Table 1. The copper  equivalent would require updating in line with JORC 2012. 
 
 |          | Ben Lomond: A  substantial re-drilling / drilling campaign would be required with the  associated work necessary to report the resource in accordance with JORC  (2012). 
 
 |          | Coles Hill, Tony M: It  is expected that all future Mineral Reserve and Mineral Resource  estimates of IsoEnergy will be prepared in accordance with the  then-prevailing Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum  Code and Canadian National Instrument NI 43- 101. Planning and  scheduling of future work that may be required to advance the Mineral  Resources from an historical classification to a current Mineral  Resource, as defined by the CIM Code, will be done as technical  evaluation of the project is progressed. 
 "Offset  drilling" of key drill holes in the Coles Hill North and Coles Hill  South uranium deposits will be required to confirm the validity of the  historical drill results from the Marline Oil drilling program.
 
 
 
 Only a limited drilling program would be required to verify the Tony M resources under the JORC Code.
 
 
 |          | Daneros: Additional  work required to evaluate, confirm, and upgrade the historical Mineral  Resources at Daneros would by rotary and core drilling to validate  historical drilling information, and infill rotary and core drilling to  test potential extensions to known mineralized zones, and underground  long hole drilling. 
 
 |          | Dieter Lake: The  competent person of the independent geological consulting firm that  IsoEnergy engaged in 2025 to update the Dieter Lake historical foreign  resource estimate to current NI43-101 and CIM standards recommended that  historic drill hole data verification will be required - including a  visit to the property to verify drill hole locations and carry out  verification sampling. The property visit was done in July 2025.  Verification samples were collected but helicopter issues prevented  conformation of drill hole collar locations from being completed. The  consultant's report is pending. There is no present intention to report  the estimate in accordance with the JORC Code (2012) edition, as  IsoEnergy is not presently required to comply with this reporting code. 
 
 |          | Sage Plain: Historic  resources at the Sage Plain project could be advanced to "current"  status under the CIM Code through additional rotary and core drilling  programs. Any future Mineral Reserve and Mineral Resource estimates of  IsoEnergy Limited will be prepared in accordance with the  then-prevailing Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum  Code and the context of Canadian National Instrument NI 43- 101. 
 
 |          | Matoush: An  evaluation of the work required to verify the historical, foreign  mineral resource estimates as Mineral Resources or Ore Reserves in  accordance with JORC 92012) code has not been done. 
 
 |          | Hurricane: An  evaluation of the work required to verify the foreign mineral resource  estimates as Mineral Resources or Ore Reserves in accordance with JORC  (2012) code has not been done. 
 
 |          | 5.12.8 
 
 | The  proposed timing of any evaluation and/or exploration work that the  entity intends to undertake and a comment on how the entity intends to  fund that work. 
 
 | Milo: Further  drilling is planned to extend the resource. The entity can fund that  work from existing capital. Initial Reverse Circulation drill program of  1,000m being contemplated for Q2 2026. 
 
 |          | Ben Lomond: Not presently planned. 
 
 |          | Coles Hill: Drilling to confirm the historical drill results is yet to be planned but will be funded from existing sources. 
 
 |          | Tony M:  Current work at the Tony M project relates to assessment of technical  topics that may have a bearing on future development and operation of  the Tony M mine. Such a work program has not been scheduled. This work  is being funded through IsoEnergy's current budget. 
 
 |          | Daneros: A  confirmation drilling program at the Daneros project has not yet been  scheduled. Future work at the Daneros project would be funded by  IsoEnergy's existing resources. 
 
 |          | Deiter Lake: IsoEnergy  has engaged an independent geological consulting firm to update the  historical Mineral Resource estimate to current NI43-101 and CIM  standards. It is anticipated their report will be received by December  31, 2025 but until their evaluation of historical drill hole data is  complete it is uncertain whether the Mineral Resource estimate will be  received in 2025. 
 
 |          | Sage Plain: Exploration  and confirmation drilling for the Sage Plain project has not yet been  scheduled. Future activities at the Sage Plain project will be funded  through IsoEnergy's existing resources. 
 
 |          | Matoush:  There  is no present intention to report the estimate in accordance with the  JORC Code (2012) edition, as IsoEnergy is not presently required to  comply with this reporting code. 
 
 |          | Hurricane:  There  is no present intention to report the estimate in accordance with the  JORC Code (2012) edition, as IsoEnergy is not presently required to  comply with this reporting code. 
 
 |          | 5.12.9 
 
 | A  cautionary statement proximate to, and with equal prominence as, the  reported historical estimates or foreign estimates stating that: 
 •       the estimates are historical estimates or foreign estimates
 and are not reported in accordance with the JORC Code;
 
 •       a competent person has not done sufficient work to classify
 the historical estimates or foreign estimates as Mineral Resources or Ore Reserves in accordance with the JORC Code; and
 
 •        it is uncertain that following evaluation and/or further exploration  work that the historical estimates or foreign estimates will be able to  be reported as Mineral Resources or Ore Reserves in accordance with the  JORC Code.
 
 
 | A proximate cautionary statement has also been included within the main body of this announcement as required. 
 
 |          | 5.12.10 
 
 | A  statement by a named competent person or persons that the information  in the market announcement provided under rules 5.12.2 to 5.12.7 is an  accurate representation of the available data and studies for the  material mining project. The statement must include the information  referred to in rule 5.22(b) and (c). 
 
 | The  information in this announcement provided under ASX Listing Rules  5.12.2 to 5.12.7 is an accurate representation of the available data and  studies for the IsoEnergy projects and has been reviewed by the  competent person or persons named below. 
 
 |          | Milo, Ben Lomond: Peter  James Mullens. Peter James Mullens is an employee of IsoEnergy and a  fellow of the Australian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. Mr Mullens  consents to the inclusion in this release of the matters based on that  information in the form and context in which it appears. 
 
 |          | Daneros, Sage Plain, Coles Hill, Tony M: Dean  T. Wilton. Dean T Wilton is a consultant to IsoEnergy, a member of the  Australian Institute of Professional Geoscientists and a Certified  Professional Geologist as designated by the American Institute of  Professional Geologists. Mr Wilton consents to the inclusion in this  release of the matters based on that information in the form and context  in which it appears. 
 
 |          | Dieter Lake, Matoush, Hurricane: Daniel  Brisbin. Daniel Brisbin is an employee of IsoEnergy and a member of  Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of Saskatchewan.  Mr Brisbin consents to the inclusion in this release of the matters  based on that information in the form and context in which it appears. 
 
 |  
 
 Mineral Resource Estimates of Toro Energy
 
 Notes:
 
 
 Annexure A        Scheme Implementation DeedData in the table has been rounded to 1 decimal place, which is the  nearest 100,000t or lbs in the case of ore and contained oxide  respectively; this can cause rounding errors in subsequent calculations.The JORC Table 1 relevant to all of the resource estimations  related to the resources stated in the above table can be found in  Toro's ASX announcement of September 24, 2024, except for Theseus, which  can be found in Toro's ASX announcement of December 5, 2012. For the  purposes of ASX Listing Rule 5.23 Toro confirms that it is not aware of  any new information or data that materially affects the information  included in those original announcements, and that all material  assumptions and technical parameters underpinning the estimates in the  original announcements continue to apply and have not materially  changed.Refer to relevant Competent Persons statements as given in this release.All resources prepared in accordance with JORC 2012, except Theseus  which is in accordance with JORC 2004. Information contained in this  release in connection with the Theseus Project was prepared and first  disclosed under the JORC Code 2004.  It has not been updated since to  comply with the JORC Code 2012 on the basis that the information has not  materially changed since it was last reported. 
 
 SOURCE IsoEnergy Ltd.
 
 
  Further Information & Investor Relations Inquiries: IsoEnergy Ltd.: Philip Williams, CEO and Director, Email: info@isoenergy.ca, Phone: 1-833-572-2333, Website: www.isoenergy.ca; Toro Energy Ltd.: Richard Homsany, Executive Chairman, Email: info@toroenergy.com.au, Phone: +61 8 9214 2100, Website: toroenergy.com.au |