Good question. The answer you are looking for is in "Oppression Of Minority Shareholders".
The irony here is that Kinross holding 75% would be under far greater scrutiny than if they never acquired the shares at all. Now, the law considers them to be a "big dog" and requires them to play nice.
Tye and the Kinross team are very unhappy right now. If they don't get to 90% they are left with two companies and greater legal risk.
Regards,
George