Court Update November 28th 2022 Medcan v CGB, page-66

Whilst there is this background case in the happening, it's very interesting that the Mars Mining Limited company, identified by @FrankAZ, is getting involved in the mining game; even more-so having interests in 4 different countries which must have taken some time to arrange.

Refer -



Here's some details from ASIC regarding the company -



Established on 13 October 2021, same address as CGB and yes, definitely some familiar names there. If I recall, David Evans is responsible for the overseas Cannabis cultivation activities and is the partner shareholder in the overseas entities. The 2022 financial statements note he has been remunerated -


Yet, there remains an unexplained question. If Mars Mining Limited has the same individuals responsible as CGB & its subsidiaries, holds interests in/undertakes mining related activities which CGB has done & notes still as a sector of its activity, and has the same registered address, why then is it not owned by CGB? Being in existence before 30 June 2022 would mean that if it was a majority owned subsidiary, it would be listed in the controlled entities - the list of which is as follows:


It is clearly absent.

Being an unlisted public company, shareholders aren't listed on an ASIC search for Mars Mines Limited. This begs the question - does CGB hold a non-controlling interest in Mars Mines Limited? My guess is no, as there is no mention of Mars Mines Limited in any report released either.

Is this an undisclosed conflict of interest?

Shareholders should be posing the question - why do my director and cultivation manager have an interest in a single mining-interested company which is separate to CGB?

The repeated question over the years by CGB shareholders and non-shareholders alike has been 'is the remuneration appropriate for management?' & the answer provided from the company has been 'yes, in comparison to our peers it is'.

The missed part of the question is this - how many roles are being simultaneously carried out by upper management and how many hours are being dedicated to the company group for what they are being paid?

One CEO of an ASX listed company cannot be compared against CEO of another ASX listed company if one party has multiple side gigs and the other does not.

Based on what we can see here, one would hope this entity is not the subject of the alleged acquisition either.