Extract to table

This tension between the stated net-zero commitment and the simultaneous deployment of offering proceeds to hydrocarbon development is one of the principal vulnerabilities identified in our analysis and must be addressed in the OM disclosure

Under this prong, the cautionary language need not identify the specific factor that ultimately causes actual results to differ, but it must be substantive and tailored — not merely boilerplate

Implications The inapplicability of the PSLRA safe harbor means that Dunmore must rely on the common-law "bespeaks caution" doctrine as its primary defense against claims that the net-zero commitment in the OM is materially misleading

The key elements required to invoke the bespeaks caution doctrine are as follows: (i) The statement must be genuinely forward-looking

(ii) The statement must be accompanied by cautionary language that is specific, substantive, and tailored

The cautionary language must identify the particular risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking statement