I think this is more a case of that consent wasn't sought as opposed to consent was denied. As asking consent to say in a prospectus that the appointed auditor is the auditor of the company seems a little trivial, in my opinion.
If Nexia were no longer auditors then I believe the company would be required to lodge ASIC form 315 within 14 days (https://asic.gov.au/regulatory-resources/forms/forms-folder/315-notification-of-resignation-removal-or-cessation-of-auditor/).
I also believe that to remove an auditor will likely require a special resolution of the shareholders or if Nexia were to resign then I believe ASIC would be required to provide consent. If Nexia had resigned I would have thought that CGB would have to disclose this under their continuous disclosure obligations - though I am happy to be corrected on this requirement.
- Forums
- ASX - By Stock
- Ann: Non-Renounceable Issue - Prospectus
I think this is more a case of that consent wasn't sought as...
-
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 10 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)
Featured News
Add CGB (ASX) to my watchlist
Currently unlisted public company.
The Watchlist
LPM
LITHIUM PLUS MINERALS LTD.
Simon Kidston, Non--Executive Director
Simon Kidston
Non--Executive Director
SPONSORED BY The Market Online