Will we all be rich tomorrow?, page-163

Agree.
Is this another example of PMA?

"CGB does have a very important point of difference to the Australian market and that is Thailand if they can capitalise on it."

The only point of difference that I can see is that CGB has not achieved anything over the preceding +12 months. Except for an administrative oversight. In the absence of announcements to the contrary, it is reasonable for posters and holders to conclude that there has been not been any commercial activity of any significance whatsoever for quite some time.

ASIC Initiated Deregistration.

According to ASIC, a letter is sent to the company Directors and/or liquidator (where applicable) to advise of the pending deregistration. It is fair to assume that that letter would have been received by CGB on or before 30 January 2024.

Q 1. If, that letter was received, should that have been communicated by CGB to its shareholders in accordance with the disclosure rules of the ASX?
Q 2. If, there has been a failure or, omission to disclose that advice to the market, where does that act or omission sit in relation to fiduciary duties?



If a company is deregistered it will also be dissolved. This action will have an impact in a number of ways.

The company will lose its legal capacity (i.e. it will no longer be recognised as a legal entity). One of the effects of that event is that any legal proceedings that the company was a party to can no longer continue. Any new legal proceedings against the company can not be instituted either.

1. At the end of the two months this would close the Medcan action?
2. Additionally, aggrieved shareholders, or other interested parties, would not be able to commence any legal action against CGB following deregistration.

Property owned by the company vests in ASIC while property held on trust vests in the Commonwealth represented by ASIC. In essence, the regulator will take control of, and assume any benefit of company property.

3. This would include the cash at bank (if there's any left).

The rights of ‘former’ officeholders become both restricted and limited. They no longer have the right to deal with property and other assets that were registered in the company's name.

These are significant outcomes that may result from an "oversight" to pay fees.

Alternatively, and depending on one's perspective - such an oversight may prove beneficial for some parties.

As a shareholder, it might be useful to know how much cash is left in the bank account. Perhaps, that might be a question for those posters/holders who are communicating with the company?