Ann: Fourteenth Supplementary Prospectus, page-110

Actually - having just reviewed my response BD you have actually asked me two questions. My response is incomplete and it ought to have read.

"Do you believe that the company prospectus would legally be able to leave out any information relating to AGMPL or Aus Gem Stone Mining that prevented it from recompliance?"

BD

Without having all of the facts available - I would say no.

I would say yes ... CGB could legally leave out details surrounding AGMPL or, Aus Gem Stone Mining for the reasons noted below.

And

I would say no ... there's nothing that I am aware of that involves AGMPL that would prevent CGB from re-listing.

Rationale

Each company has its own legal identity - similar to a person / individual.

Under the law you are not held liable for your neighbours acts or omissions only for your own. The same is true for companies. Each company is like a person under the law. A company attracts legal rights (the right to hold property and enter into contracts) as well as obligations (the obligation to pay tax and follow the laws of Australia).

In so far as I am aware AGMPL is not a subsidiary of CGB so it is like a neighbour using the above example. However, it is a neighbour that supplies goods and services to CGB.

Irrespective, the issues of AGMPL (if there are any) are its business and would not impact upon CGB and its prospects to be re-listed on the ASX. These are merely my views and they must not to be taken to be or used as advice for any purpose whatsoever.

I will request my earlier post is moderated.