Maiden Holdings Ltd

We may become involved in various claims and legal proceedings that arise in the normal course of our business, which are not likely to have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations or liquidity.

Except as noted below, we are not a party to any material legal proceedings. From time to time, we are subject to routine legal proceedings, including arbitrations, arising in the ordinary course of business. These legal proceedings generally relate to claims asserted by or against us in the ordinary course of insurance or reinsurance operations. Based on our opinion, the eventual outcome of these legal proceedings is not expected to have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations.

In April 2009, we learned that Bentzion S. Turin, the former Chief Operating Officer, General Counsel and Secretary of Maiden Holdings and Maiden Reinsurance, sent a letter to the U.S. Department of Labor claiming that his employment with the Company was terminated in retaliation for corporate whistleblowing in violation of the whistleblower protection provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Mr. Turin alleged that he was terminated for raising concerns regarding corporate governance with respect to the negotiation of the terms of the Trust Preferred Securities Offering. He seeks reinstatement as Chief Operating Officer, General Counsel and Secretary of Maiden Holdings and Maiden Reinsurance, back pay and legal fees incurred. On December 31, 2009, the U.S. Secretary of Labor found no reasonable cause for Mr. Turin’s claim and dismissed the complaint in its entirety. Mr. Turin objected to the Secretary's findings and requested a hearing before an administrative law judge in the U.S. Department of Labor. The Company moved to dismiss Mr. Turin's complaint, and its motion was granted by the Administrative Law Judge on June 30, 2011. On July 13, 2011, Mr. Turin filed a petition for review of the Administrative Law Judge's decision with the Administrative Review Board in the U.S. Department of Labor.

On March 29, 2013, the Administrative Review Board reversed the dismissal of the complaint on procedural grounds, and remanded the case to the administrative law judge. The administrative hearing began in September 2014 and concluded in November 2018. On September 2, 2021, Administrative Law Judge Theresa C. Timlin of the U.S. Department of Labor issued a decision and order which denied Mr. Turin’s complaint in full. On September 16, 2021, Mr. Turin filed a petition for review of the Administrative Law Judge's decision with the Administrative Review Board in the U.S. Department of Labor. On June 29, 2023, the Administrative Review Board issued a decision and order which summarily affirmed the September 2, 2021 decision and order of the Administrative Law Judge. The decision and order of the Administrative Review Board became the final order of the Secretary of Labor on July 27, 2023. On July 28, 2023, Mr. Turin filed a petition for review of the final order of the Secretary of Labor in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The Secretary of Labor is the respondent before the Second Circuit and the Court granted the Company's petition to intervene in order to present its position to the Court. On November 13, 2024, the Second Circuit found Turin’s arguments to be without merit and denied the petition for review.

A putative class action complaint was filed against Maiden Holdings, Arturo M. Raschbaum, Karen L. Schmitt, and John M. Marshaleck in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey on February 11, 2019. On February 19, 2020, the Court appointed lead plaintiffs, and on May 1, 2020, lead plaintiffs filed an amended class action complaint (the “Amended Complaint”). The Amended Complaint asserts violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 (and Section 20(a) for control person liability) arising in large part from allegations that Maiden failed to take adequate loss reserves in connection with reinsurance provided to AmTrust. Plaintiffs further claim that certain of Maiden Holdings’ representations concerning its business, underwriting and financial statements were rendered false by the allegedly inadequate loss reserves, that these misrepresentations inflated the price of Maiden Holdings' common stock, and that when the truth about the misrepresentations was revealed, the Company’s stock price fell, causing Plaintiffs to incur losses. On September 11, 2020, a motion to dismiss was filed on behalf of all Defendants. On August 6, 2021, the Court issued an order denying, in part, Defendants’ motion to dismiss, ordering Plaintiffs to file a shorter amended complaint no later than August 20, 2021, and permitting discovery to proceed on a limited basis. On February 7, 2023, the District Court denied Plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration of the District Court’s decision denying Plaintiffs’ objection to the Magistrate Judge’s December 2021 ruling on discovery. On May 26, 2023, the Company filed a Renewed Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint or, in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment, which has been fully briefed. On December 19, 2023, the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey granted summary judgment on plaintiffs’ claim for securities fraud under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act to Maiden Holdings, Ltd. and individual defendants Arturo Raschbaum, Karen Schmitt, and John Marshalek. The Court held that the factual record failed to support, as a matter of law, plaintiffs’ allegations that the defendants had made false statements regarding the Company’s loss reserves. The Court also dismissed plaintiffs’ claims that the individual defendants were liable as control persons under Section 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act for any such alleged false statements. Plaintiffs have appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.

On December 26, 2024, WUSO Holding Corporation and 683 Capital Partners filed a lawsuit against Maiden NA and Maiden Holdings in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, captioned WUSO Holding Corporation and 683 Capital Partners, LP v. Maiden Holdings North America, Ltd. and Maiden Holdings, Ltd., Index No. 659861/2024. The complaint alleges that Maiden’s sale of Maiden Reinsurance North America, Inc., which closed approximately six years ago from the date of the complaint, breached a sole provision of Maiden’s indenture governing its 2013 Senior Notes. Plaintiffs allege that principal and interest payable under the 2013 Senior Notes are due currently, rather than upon the stated maturity date of the 2013 Senior Notes. Maiden believes it has substantial procedural and substantive defenses to the asserted claims, and it intends to vigorously defend against these claims.

We believe all of the above claims are without merit and we intend to vigorously defend ourselves. It is possible that additional lawsuits will be filed against the Company, its subsidiaries and its respective officers due to the diminution in value of our securities as a result of our operating results and financial condition. It is currently uncertain as to the effect of such litigation on our business, operating results and financial condition.