Part I

References in this Annual Report on Form 20-F to “we,” “our” and the “Company” refer to Pacific Therapeutics Ltd . and its predecessor, as applicable, individually and collectively with its subsidiaries as the context requires.

Brief Introduction

Pacific Therapeutics Ltd. is a British Columbia, Canada corporation, incorporated on September 12, 2005. It is a reporting Company in British Columbia and Ontario, and its shares are listed for trading on the Canadian Securities Exchange (“CSE”).

Subsequent to the year ended December 31, 2015, the Company sold the assets related to its pharmaceutical business and on January 12,2017, the Company completed a fundamental change (the “Fundamental Change Transaction”) that result in the Company changing its business operations to the development, ownership and operation of multitenant communications real estate primarily in Latin America. The Company also changed its name to “Tower Once Wireless Corp.” in connection with such transaction.

This Amendment No. 1 to the 2015 Form 20-F is intended to reflect the Company’s business and operations as of the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015. Please see the Company’s Form 20-F, as amended for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2016 for information about the Company’s business and operations after the completion of the Fundamental Change Transaction.

Please note that the following risk factors relate to the Company’s business and operations during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, and do not cover the Company’s business and operations after the completion of the Fundamental Change Transaction. For information concerning the risks associated with the Company’s business and operations after the fundamental transaction, please see the Company’s Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2016, currently filed with the SEC.

Issuer Risk - Risks that are specific to the Company

Insufficient Funds to Accomplish the Company's Business Objectives

The Company remains under constant working capital pressures. As of December 31, 2015, the Company had a working capital deficit of $609,411. In the near future, potential revenues cannot support existing and upcoming expenses or other capital requirements. When the current funding has been expended, the Company will require and is planning for additional funding. There is no assurance that this funding will be available when required by the Company and/or available on suitable terms. Furthermore, the Company expects negative operating cash flows for the immediately foreseeable future.

Substantial Capital Requirements for Research and Development

The Company anticipates that it may make substantial research and development expenditures for clinical trials in the future. As the Company has no operating revenue being generated from its research and development activities, the Company does not expect to generate any revenue in the near future and may have limited ability to expend the capital necessary to undertake or complete future research and development work. There can be no assurance that debt or equity financing will be available or sufficient to meet these requirements or for other corporate purposes or, if debt or equity financing is available, that it will be on terms acceptable to the Company. Moreover, future activities may require the Company to alter its capitalization significantly. If the Company is unable to obtain additional financing, it may be unable to complete the development and commercialization of PTL-202 and PTL-303 or continue its research and development programs.

Unanticipated Costs and Delays

The Company may be subject to unanticipated costs or delays that would accelerate its need for additional capital or increase the costs of individual clinical trials. If the Company is unable to raise additional capital when required or on acceptable terms, it may have to significantly delay, scale back or discontinue the development and/or commercialization of one or more of its product candidates. The Company may also be required to:

• seek collaborators for our product candidates at an earlier stage than otherwise would be desirable and on terms that are less favorable than might otherwise be available; or

• relinquish or license on unfavorable terms its rights to technologies or product candidates that it otherwise would seek to develop or commercialize itself.

Uncertainty of Additional Financing

The Company does not have the existing capital resources to fund operations to complete a pivotal bio-availability study of PTL-202 providing information for future development studies. The Company anticipates that it will need to raise additional capital, through private placements or public offerings of its equity or debt securities, in addition to the capital on hand, to complete the long-term development and commercialization of its current product candidates. The inability of the Company to access sufficient additional capital for its operations could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations or prospects. In particular, failure to obtain such financing on a timely basis could cause the Company to miss certain acquisition opportunities and reduce or terminate its business.

Dilution

To date the Company’s sources of cash have been limited primarily to proceeds from the founders, friends and retail investors. It is likely that the Company will enter into more agreements to issue Common Shares and warrants and options to purchase Common Shares.

The impact of the issuance of a significant amount of Common Shares from the exercise of the Company’s outstanding warrants and options could place downward pressure on the market price of the Common Shares.

The Company cannot be certain that additional funding will be available on acceptable terms, or at all. To the extent that the Company raises additional funds by issuing equity securities, its shareholders may experience significant dilution. Any debt

8

financing, if available, may involve restrictive covenants, such as limitations on the Company’s ability to incur additional indebtedness, limitations on its ability to acquire or license intellectual property rights and other operating restrictions that could adversely impact its ability to conduct business.

No History of Sales or Profits

The Company does not have a history of earnings or profit, has never had any products available for commercial sale and has not generated any revenue from product sales. The Company does not anticipate that it will generate revenue from the sale of products for the foreseeable future and has not yet submitted any products for approval by regulatory authorities. The Company continues to incur research and development and general and administrative expenses related to its operations. There is no assurance that in the future the Company will develop revenues, operate profitably or provide a return on investment. Therefore, investors should not invest on the expectation of receiving dividends or any guaranteed return on their investment of any nature. The Company is expected to continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future and expects these losses to increase as it continues research activities and development of its product candidates, seeks regulatory approvals for its product candidates, and acquires rights to additional products for development. If the Company’s product candidates fail in clinical trials or do not gain regulatory approval, or if its product candidates do not achieve market acceptance, the Company may never become profitable. Even if the Company achieves profitability in the future, it may not be able to sustain profitability in subsequent periods.

No History of Paying Dividends

An increase in the market price of the Company’s Common Shares, which is uncertain and unpredictable, may be an investor’s sole source of gain from an investment in the Company’s Common Shares. An investment in the Company’s Common Shares may not be appropriate for investors who require dividend income.

No dividends have been paid on the Company's Common Shares since inception and there is no assurance that such dividends will be earned or paid in the future. For the foreseeable future, the Company expects to re-invest in its operations all cash flow that might otherwise be available for distribution to shareholders in the form of cash dividends. While the payment of stock dividends is an alternative, there is no assurance that these will be paid in the foreseeable future. The Company does not anticipate paying any dividends on the Shares in the foreseeable future. As a result, capital appreciation, if any, of the Company’s Common Shares will be the shareholder’s sole source of gain for the foreseeable future.

Commercializing of Drug Candidates

In order to successfully commercialize drugs, the Company must enter into collaborations with partners to develop a capable sales, marketing and distribution infrastructure. The Company intends to enter into partnering, co-promotion and other distribution arrangements to commercialize products in most markets. However, the Company may not be able to enter into collaborations on acceptable terms, if at all, and may face competition in its search for partners with whom to collaborate. If the Company is unable to develop collaborations with one or more partners to perform these functions, it may not be able to successfully commercialize its products, which could cause the Company to cease operations.

Dependence on the Success of PTL-202

PTL-202, the Company’s lead product candidate, has been tested in pre-clinical models of lung Fibrosis. These tests indicate that PTL-202 may be an effective drug to treat Pulmonary Fibrosis. PTL-202 was cleared by regulators to begin Phase 1 clinical trials during 2012. This drug/drug interaction trial was concluded in September 2012.

In order to market PTL-202, the Company, in conjunction with its collaborators, will have to conduct additional clinical trials, including bioequivelency, Phase 2 proof of principal clinical trials as well as Phase 3 clinical trials, to demonstrate safety and efficacy. The Company has not initiated any Phase 2 or Phase 3 clinical trials with any of its product candidates. If the proposed clinical trials generate safety concerns or demonstrate a lack of efficacy, or competitive products developed by third parties show significant benefit in the indications in which the Company is developing product candidates, any planned clinical trial may be delayed, altered or not initiated and PTL-202 may never receive regulatory approval or be successfully commercialized.

The Company’s other product candidate, PTL-303, has only been tested in cellular assays to determine a signal as a possible drug candidate. PTL-303 has not been tested in animals or humans.

Even if the Company’s product candidates receive regulatory approval, the Company or its collaborators may not be successful in marketing them for a number of reasons, including the introduction by competitors of more clinically-effective

9

or cost-effective alternatives or failure in the Company or collaborator’s sales and marketing efforts.

Any failure to obtain approval of PTL-202 or PTL-303, and successfully commercialize them, would have a material and adverse impact on the Company’s business, which could cause the Company to cease operations.

Reliance on the Company’s management

Investors will in large part entrust their funds to the directors, management, and other professional advisors in whose judgment investors must depend with only limited information about their specific evaluation of the “sound business reasons” on which any reallocation of funds would be based. The Company's financing and enterprise acquisition/development policies and practices may be changed at the discretion of the Board of Directors. Persons who are not willing to rely on the Company’s management and/or Directors should not purchase the Company’s Shares.

Attraction and Retention of the Company’s Management

The Company may not be able to attract or retain qualified management and scientific personnel in the future due to the intense competition for qualified personnel among specialty pharmaceutical, biotechnology, pharmaceutical and other businesses. If the Company is not able to attract and retain the necessary personnel to accomplish its business objectives, the achievement of its development objectives, its ability to raise additional capital and its ability to implement its business strategy may be significantly reduced. In particular, if the Company loses any members of its senior management team, it may not be able to find suitable replacements in a timely fashion, or at all, and the business may be harmed as a result.

Use of Contract Personnel

From time to time the Company will need to contract additional personnel to continue its expansion. The Company uses scientific, clinical and regulatory advisors extensively to assist in formulating its development and clinical strategies. These advisors are not the Company’s employees and may have commitments to, or consulting or advisory contracts with, other entities that may limit their availability to the Company. In addition, these advisors may have arrangements with other companies to assist those companies in developing products or technologies that may compete with the Company’s. If the Company is unable to contract the correct personnel, it may be unable to implement or complete its product development programs, resulting in the inability to commercialize its product candidates or generate sufficient revenue to continue in business.

Dependence on key employees, suppliers or agreements

Executive management of the Company's business is primarily provided by the Company's CEO, CFO, and Board of Directors. At this stage of its corporate development, the Company has necessarily limited the establishment of extensive administrative and operating infrastructure. Instead, the Company may rely, for necessary skills, on external adviser/consultants with extensive senior level management experience in such fields as formulation, drug development, pharmaceutical regulations, finance, manufacturing, marketing, law, and investment. The future success of the Company is very dependent upon the ongoing availability and commitment of its directors, officers and advisor consultants, not all of whom are or will be bound by formal contractual employment agreements. The absence of these formal contractual relationships may be considered to represent an area of risk.

Dependence on Third Parties to Conduct Clinical Trials

The Company will hire third parties to conduct clinical trials. If these third parties do not perform as contracted or expected, the Company may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for its drug candidates, preventing the Company from becoming profitable.

The Company relies on third parties, such as contract research organizations, medical institutions, clinical investigators and contract laboratories, to conduct its pre-clinical research and clinical trials. Although the Company relies on these third parties to conduct its clinical trials, it is responsible for ensuring that each of its clinical trials is conducted in accordance with its investigational plan and protocol, as approved by the FDA and non-U.S. regulatory authorities. Moreover, the FDA and non-U.S. regulatory authorities require the Company to comply with regulations and standards, commonly referred to as Good Clinical Practices (“GCPs”), for conducting, monitoring, recording and reporting the results of clinical trials to ensure that the data and results are scientifically credible and accurate and that the clinical trial subjects are adequately informed of the potential risks of participating in clinical trials.

The Company’s reliance on third parties does not relieve it of the above responsibilities and regulatory requirements. If the

10

third parties conducting the Company’s clinical trials do not perform their contractual duties or obligations, do not meet expected deadlines or need to be replaced, or if the quality or accuracy of the clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to GCPs or for any other reason, the Company may need to enter into new arrangements with alternative third parties, and its clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated. In addition, a failure by third parties to perform their obligations in compliance with GCPs may cause the Company’s clinical trials to fail to meet regulatory requirements, which may require the Company to repeat its clinical trials. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or meet expected deadlines, the Company may be unable to obtain regulatory approval for or commercialize its current and future product candidates.

Marketing and Distribution Risk

If the Company is unable to develop its sales and marketing and distribution capability on its own or through collaborations with marketing partners, it will not be successful in commercializing its product candidates. The Company currently does not have a marketing staff nor a sales or distribution organization. The Company does not intend to develop a sales or distribution organization internally.

The Company currently does not have marketing, sales or distribution capabilities. The Company has decided to collaborate with third parties that have direct sales forces and established distribution systems, either to augment or substitute in lieu of its own sales force and distribution systems. To the extent that the Company enters into co-promotion or other licensing arrangements, its product revenue is likely to be lower than if the Company directly marketed or sold its products, when and if it has any. In addition, any revenue received will depend in whole or in part upon the efforts of such third parties, which may not be successful and will generally not be within the Company’s control. If the Company is unable to enter into such arrangements on acceptable terms or at all, it may not be able to successfully commercialize its existing and future product candidates. If the Company is not successful in commercializing its existing and future product candidates, either on its own or through collaborations with one or more third parties, future product revenue will suffer and the Company may incur significant additional losses.

Industry Risk - Risks faced by the Company because of the industry in which it operates

Research and Development

The Company is developing new, proprietary substances, methods and processes intended to enhance the therapeutic effects of existing drugs in the treatment of diseases characterized by progressive Fibrosis. The existing drugs that form the basis of the Company’s efforts to develop new substances, methods and processes are well known, yet any scientific evidence that may exist to support the feasibility of the Company’s goals is not conclusive. If the Company is not successful in developing and marketing any new drugs, combinations of existing drugs or reformulation and repurposing of existing approved drugs it may never generate revenues and the business may fail.

Clinical Trial Design

The Company’s business strategy is to combine, reformulate and repurpose existing drugs for the treatment of new indications, and these new drug combinations or formulations may have the ability to treat many indications. The Company may incorrectly assess the market opportunities of an indication or may incorrectly estimate or fail to fully appreciate the scientific and technological difficulties associated with treating a specific indication. Furthermore, the quality and robustness of the results and data of any clinical study the Company conducts will depend upon the selection of a patient population for clinical testing. If the selected population is not representative of the intended population, further clinical testing of product candidates or termination of research and development activities related to the selected indication may be required. The Company’s ability to commence clinical testing or the choice of clinical development path could compromise business prospects and prevent the achievement of revenue.

Product Failure in Clinical Trials

Clinical trials may fail to adequately demonstrate the safety and efficacy of product candidates. The Company will be required to demonstrate with substantial evidence through well-controlled clinical trials that its product candidates are safe and effective for use in a diverse population before the Company can seek regulatory approvals for their commercial sale. Negative results from clinical trials will prevent the commercialization of a drug candidate. If the Company cannot show that its product candidates are both safe and effective in clinical trials, it will need to re-evaluate its strategic plans.

Positive results from pre-clinical studies and early clinical trials should not be relied upon as evidence that later-stage or large-scale clinical trials will succeed. Success in early clinical trials does not mean that future clinical trials will be

11

successful because product candidates in later-stage clinical trials may fail to demonstrate sufficient safety and efficacy to the satisfaction of the FDA and other non-U.S. regulatory authorities, despite having progressed through initial clinical trials.

Even after the completion of Phase 3 clinical trials, the FDA or other non-U.S. regulatory authorities may disagree with the Company’s clinical trial design and its interpretation of data, and may require the Company to conduct additional clinical trials to demonstrate the efficacy of its product candidates.

Regulatory Risk and Market Approval

Any products that the Company develops will be subject to extensive government regulations relating to development, clinical trials, manufacturing and commercialization. In the United States, for example, the drug combinations that the Company intends to develop and market are regulated by the FDA under its new drug development and review process. Before any therapeutic products can be marketed, the sponsor company must obtain clearance from the FDA by submitting an investigational new drug application, then by successfully completing human testing under three phases of clinical trials, and finally by submitting a new drug application.

The time required to obtain approvals for drug combinations or reformulations from the FDA and other agencies in foreign locales with similar processes is unpredictable. There is no assurance that the Company will ever receive regulatory approval to use its proprietary drug combinations or reformulations as human therapeutics. If such regulatory approval is not obtained, the Company may never become profitable.

Failure to Receive Regulatory Approval f or Clinical Trials

The Company’s clinical development programs for PTL-202 and PTL-303 may not receive regulatory approval for clinical trials if the Company fails to demonstrate that they are safe and effective in pre-clinical trials. Consequently, failure to obtain necessary approvals from the FDA or similar non-U.S. regulatory agencies to operate clinical trials for the Company’s product candidates could result in delays to the Company’s product development efforts.

Manufacture and Supply of Drug Candidates

The Company does not own or operate manufacturing facilities, and it depends on third-party contract manufacturers for production of its product candidates. The Company has no experience in drug formulation or manufacturing, and it lacks the resources and the capability to manufacture any of its product candidates. Product candidates have been purchased in limited quantities for pre-clinical studies from scientific supply houses. For Phase 1 and 2 clinical trials of PTL-202, the Company will need to obtain additional quantities of active pharmaceutical ingredients. The Company will need to contract with a manufacturer for a supply of PTL-303 for pre-clinical, and Investigational New Drug-enabling toxicology studies and initial clinical trials (Phase 1 and 2). If, in the future, one of the Company’s product candidates is approved for commercial sale, the Company or its collaborator will need to manufacture that product candidate in commercial quantities. The Company cannot guarantee that the third-party manufacturers with which it has previously contracted will have sufficient capacity to satisfy future manufacturing needs of PTL-202 or PTL-303, or that the Company will be able to negotiate additional purchases of active pharmaceutical ingredients or drug products from these or alternative manufacturers on terms favourable to the Company, or at all.

Third party manufacturers may fail to perform under their contractual obligations, or may fail to deliver the required commercial quantities of bulk active ingredients or finished product on a timely basis and at commercially reasonable prices. Any performance failure on the part of the Company’s contract manufacturers could delay clinical development or regulatory approval of the Company’s product candidates or commercialization of its future product candidates, depriving the Company of potential product revenue and resulting in additional losses.

If the Company is required to identify and qualify an alternate manufacturer, it may be forced to delay or suspend its clinical trials, regulatory submissions, required approvals or commercialization of its product candidates, which may cause it to incur higher costs and could prevent the successfully commercializing its product candidates. If the Company is unable to find one or more replacement manufacturers capable of production at a reasonably favourable cost, in enough volume, of adequate quality, and on a timely basis, the Company would likely be unable to meet demand for its product candidates and its clinical trials could be delayed or it could lose potential revenue. The Company’s ability to replace an existing active pharmaceutical ingredient manufacturer may be difficult because the number of potential manufacturers may be limited and the FDA or non-US regulator must approve any replacement manufacturer before it can begin manufacturing the Company’s product candidates. Such approval would require new testing and compliance inspections. It may be difficult or impossible for the Company to identify and engage a replacement manufacturer on acceptable terms in a timely manner, or at all.

12

The Company expects to continue to depend on third-party contract manufacturers for the foreseeable future. The Company’s product candidates require precise, high quality manufacturing. Any of the Company’s contract manufacturers will be subject to ongoing periodic unannounced inspection by the FDA and non-U.S. regulatory authorities to ensure strict compliance with current Good Manufacturing Practice (“cGMP”), and other applicable government regulations and corresponding standards. If the Company’s contract manufacturers fail to achieve and maintain high manufacturing standards in compliance with cGMP regulations, the Company may experience manufacturing errors resulting in patient injury or death, product recalls or withdrawals, delays or interruptions of production or failures in product testing or delivery, delay or prevention of filing or approval of marketing applications for the Company’s product candidates, cost overruns or other problems that could seriously harm its business.

Significant scale-up of manufacturing may require additional validation studies, which the FDA must review and approve. Additionally, any third party manufacturers the Company retains to manufacture its product candidates on a commercial scale must pass an FDA or non-US regulator pre-approval inspection for conformance to the cGMPs before the Company can obtain approval of its product candidates. If the Company is unable to successfully increase the manufacturing capacity for a product candidate in conformance with cGMPs, the regulatory approval or commercial launch of any related products may be delayed or there may be a shortage in supply.

Market Acceptance of the Company’s Products

Even if the Company receives the necessary regulatory approvals to commercially sell its drug candidates, the success of these candidates will depend on their acceptance by physicians and patients, and reimbursement among other things.

In the United States and elsewhere, the Company’s product revenues will depend principally upon the reimbursement rates established by third-party payors, including government health administration authorities, managed-care providers, public health insurers, private health insurers and other organizations. These third-party payors are increasingly challenging the price, and examining the cost effectiveness, of medical products and services. In addition, significant uncertainty exists as to the reimbursement status, if any, of newly approved drugs, pharmaceutical products or product indications. The Company may need to conduct post-marketing clinical trials in order to demonstrate the cost-effectiveness of products. Such clinical trials may require the Company to commit a significant amount of management time, financial and other resources. If reimbursement of the Company’s product candidates is unavailable or limited in scope or amount or if pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels, the Company’s revenues could be reduced.

In some countries other than the United States, particularly the countries of the European Union and Canada, the pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals is subject to government controls. In these countries, obtaining pricing approval from government authorities can take six to twelve months or longer after the receipt of regulatory marketing approval of a product for an indication. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval in some countries, the Company may be required to conduct a clinical trial that compares the cost-effectiveness of its product candidate to other available therapies. The Company’s revenues could be reduced if reimbursement of a product candidate is unavailable or limited in scope or amount or if pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels.

Canadian, US, European and other foreign governments continue to propose and pass legislation designed to reduce the cost of healthcare, including drugs. In the United States, there have been, and the Company expects that there will continue to be, federal and state proposals to implement similar government control. In addition, increasing emphasis on managed care in the United States will continue to put pressure on the pricing of pharmaceutical products. For example, the Medicare Prescription Drug Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003 reforms the way Medicare will cover and reimburse for pharmaceutical products. The legislation expands Medicare coverage for drug purchases by the elderly and eventually will introduce a new reimbursement methodology based on average sales prices for certain drugs. In addition, the new legislation provides authority for limiting the number of outpatient drugs that will be covered in any therapeutic class. As a result of the new legislation and the expansion of federal coverage of drug products, the Company expects that there will be additional pressure to contain and reduce costs.

The Medicaid program and state healthcare laws and regulations in the USA may also be modified to change the scope of covered products and/or reimbursement methodology. Cost control initiatives could decrease the established reimbursement rates that the Company receives for any products in the future, which would limit its revenues and profitability. Legislation and regulations affecting the pricing of pharmaceutical products, including PTL-202 and PTL-303, may change at any time, which could further limit or eliminate reimbursement rates for PTL-202 or other product candidates.

If the Company’s drug candidates fail to gain market acceptance, it may be unable to generate sufficient revenue to continue in business.

13

Failure to Obtain Regulatory Approval Outside the United States

The Company intends to market certain of its existing and future product candidates in non-North American markets. In order to market its existing and future product candidates in the European Union and many other non-North American jurisdictions, the Company must obtain separate regulatory approvals. The Company has had no interactions with non-North American regulatory authorities, and the approval procedures vary among countries and can involve additional testing, and the time required to obtain approval may differ from that required to obtain FDA approval.

Approval by the FDA or other regulatory authorities does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other countries, and approval by one or more non-North American regulatory authorities does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other countries or by the FDA. The non-North American regulatory approval process may include all of the risks associated with obtaining FDA approval. The Company may not obtain non-North American regulatory approvals on a timely basis, if at all. In addition, the Company may not be able to file for non-North American regulatory approvals and may not receive necessary approvals to commercialize its existing and future product candidates in any market. If such regulatory approval is not obtained, the Company may never become profitable.

Product Liability

The use of the Company’s drug candidates in clinical trials and the sale of any products for which regulatory approval is obtained may expose the Company to product liability claims from consumers, health care providers, pharmaceutical companies or other entities. Any claim brought against the Company may cause the diversion of resources from normal operations or cause the Company to cease the sale, distribution and marketing of its products that have received regulatory approval. This may cause the Company to cease operations.

Intellectual Property Rights

The Company’s commercial success will depend, in part, on obtaining and maintaining patent protection, trade secret protection and regulatory protection of its proprietary technology and information as well as successfully defending third-party challenges to its proprietary technology and information. The Company will be able to protect its proprietary technology and information from use by third parties only to the extent that valid and enforceable patents, trade secrets or regulatory protection cover them and the Company has exclusive rights to utilize them. The ability of the Company’s licensors, collaborators and suppliers to maintain their patent rights against third-party challenges to their validity, scope or enforceability will also play an important role in determining the Company’s future.

Reliance on Licensors to Maintain Patent Rights

The Company’s commercial success may also depend, in part, on maintaining patent rights that have been licensed related to products that the Company may market in the future. Since the Company will not fully control the patent prosecution of any licensed patent applications, it is possible that the licensors will not devote the same resources or attention to the prosecution of the licensed patent applications as the Company would if it controlled the prosecution of the applications. The licensor may not pursue and successfully prosecute any potential patent infringement claim, may fail to maintain their patent applications, or may pursue any litigation less aggressively than the Company would. Consequently, the resulting patent protection, if any, may not be as strong or comprehensive.

Uncertainty of Patent Protection

The patent positions of life science companies including specialty pharmaceutical companies can be highly uncertain and involve complex legal and factual questions that include unresolved principles and issues. No consistent policy regarding the breadth of claims allowed in such companies’ patents has emerged to date in the United States, and the patent situation outside the United States is even more uncertain. Changes in either the patent laws or in interpretations of patent laws in the United States or other countries may diminish the value of the Company’s intellectual property rights. Therefore, the Company cannot predict with any certainty the range of claims that may be allowed or enforced in its patents or in-licensed patents.

Reliance on Trade Secrets

The Company also relies on trade secrets to protect its technology, especially where the Company does not believe patent protection is appropriate or obtainable. However, trade secrets are difficult to protect. While the Company seeks to protect confidential information, in part, through confidentiality agreements with employees, consultants, contractors, or scientific and other advisors, they may unintentionally or wilfully disclose the Company’s confidential information to competitors.

14

Enforcing a claim against a third party related to the illegal acquisition and use of trade secrets can be expensive and time consuming, and the outcome is often unpredictable. If the Company is not able to maintain patent or trade secret protection on its technologies and product candidates, then the Company may not be able to exclude competitors from developing or marketing competing products, and the Company may not be able to operate profitability.

Intellectual Property Infringement Claims

There has been, and there will continue to be, significant litigation and demands for licenses in the life sciences industry regarding patent and other intellectual property rights. Although the Company anticipates having a valid defence to any allegation that its current product candidates, production methods and other activities infringe the valid and enforceable intellectual property rights of any third parties, the Company cannot be certain that a third party will not challenge this position in the future. Other parties may own patent rights that the Company might infringe with its drug candidates, products or other activities, and the Company’s competitors or other patent holders may assert that the Company’s products and the methods employed are covered by their patents. These parties could bring claims against the Company causing substantial litigation expenses and, if successful, may require payment of substantial damages. Some of the Company’s potential competitors may be better able to sustain the costs of complex patent litigation, and depending on the circumstances, the Company could be forced to stop or delay its research, development, manufacturing or sales activities. Any of these costs could cause the Company to go out of business.

Licensed Patent Rights

The Company has licensed patents and plans to license technologies and other patents if it believes it is necessary or useful to use third party intellectual property to develop its products, or if its product development threatens to infringe upon the intellectual property rights of third parties. The Company may be required to pay license fees or royalties or both to obtain such licenses, and there is no guarantee that such licenses will be available on acceptable terms, if at all. Even if the Company is able to successfully obtain a license, the rights may be non-exclusive, which would give the Company’s competitors’ access to the same intellectual property it has rights to, which could prevent the Company from commercializing a product.

The Company’s licensors may terminate the license. Without protection for the intellectual property that is licensed, other companies may be able to offer substantially similar products for sale, the Company may not be able to market or sell the planned products or generate any revenues.

Licenses and Permits to Operate

The operations of the Company may require licenses and permits from various governmental authorities, in both domestic and foreign jurisdictions. There can be no assurance that the Company will be able to obtain all necessary licenses and permits that may be required to carry out its research and development of its projects. Without these licenses and permits the Company may not be able to market or sell the planned products or generate any revenues.

Competition

The pharmaceutical industry is intensely competitive in all its phases, and the Company competes with other companies that have greater financial resource and technical facilities. Competition could adversely affect the Company’s ability to acquire suitable projects in the future.

Significant and increasing competition exists for pharmaceutical opportunities internationally. There are a number of large established pharmaceutical companies with substantial capabilities and far greater financial and technical resources than the Company. The Company may be unable to acquire additional attractive pharmaceutical development opportunities on terms it considers acceptable and there can be no assurance that the Company's research and development programs will yield any new drugs or result in any commercially viable compounds or technologies.

Conflicts of Interest

Certain of the directors and officers of the Company will be engaged in, and will continue to engage in, other business activities on their own behalf and on behalf of other companies (including life science companies) and, as a result of these and other activities, such directors and officers may become subject to conflicts of interest. The British Columbia Business Corporation Act (“BCBCA”) provides that in the event that a director has a material interest in a contract or proposed contract or agreement that is material to the Company, the director shall disclose his interest in such contract or agreement and shall refrain from voting on any matter in respect of such contract or agreement, subject to and in accordance with the BCBCA. To the extent that conflicts of interest arise, such conflicts will be resolved in accordance with the provisions of the

15

BCBCA. To the knowledge of the management of the Company, there are no existing or potential material conflicts of interest between the Company and a proposed director or officer of the Company except as otherwise disclosed herein.

Foreign Currency Risk

A substantial portion of the Company’s expenses and future revenues may be incurred in foreign currencies. The Company’s business will be subject to risks typical of an international business including, but not limited to, differing tax structures, regulations and restrictions and general foreign exchange rate volatility. Fluctuations in the exchange rate between the Canadian dollar and such other currencies may have a material effect on the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations and could result in downward pressure for the Company’s products or in losses from currency exchange rate fluctuations. The Company does not actively hedge against foreign currency fluctuations.

The Company is at Risk of Securities Class Action Litigation

In the past, securities class action litigation has often been brought against a company following a decline in the market price of its securities. This risk is especially relevant for the Company because biotechnology, specialty pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical companies have experienced significant stock price volatility in recent years. If the Company faces such litigation, it could result in substantial costs and a diversion of management’s attention and resources, which could harm the Company’s business.

restructuring, $440,549 of the Company’s debt in the form of accounts payable, convertible note and amounts due to related parties was assigned to Cabbay.

On January 12, 2017, the Company completed the Fundamental Change” Transaction, with Tower Three, a limited liability company formed under the laws of the Republic of Colombia on December 30, 2015, pursuant to a share exchange agreement made effective as of October 19, 2016, as amended (the “Acquisition Agreement”) among the Company, Tower Three and the shareholders of Tower Three (the “Selling Shareholders”), whereby the Company acquired 100% of the securities of Tower Three from the Selling Shareholders, by issuing 30,000,000 common shares of the Company to the Selling Shareholders on a pro-rata basis, following the completion of which, Tower Three is now a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company. Following the completion of the Tower Three Transaction, the Company began conducting the principal business of Tower Three.

The Company’s board of directors (the Board”) was reconstituted in conjunction with the closing of the Tower Three Transaction. The Board is now comprised of four (4) members, being Alejandro Ochoa, Fabio Alexander Vasquez, Robert Horsley, and Brian Gusko. The Company’s senior management now consists of Alejandro Ochoa (President and Chief Executive Officer), Abbey Abdiye (Chief Financial Officer), and Octavio De La Espriella (Chief Operating Officer).

The information about the Company, its business and operations in this Amendment No. 1 to the 2015 Form 20-F is as of the year ended December 31, 2015. For more information on the Company’s business and operations after the completion of the Fundamental Change Transaction please see the Item 4. Information on the Company in the Company’s Form 20-F, as amended for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2016, filed with the SEC.

Inter-Corporate Relationships

The Company did not have any inter-corporate relationships as at December 31, 2015.

Operating and Financial Review and Prospects

From inception through to December 31, 2012, the Company incurred total expenses in the development of its intellectual property of $1,836,405, which includes $548,204 of research and development expenses (research and development expenses on the financial statements have been offset by $53,277 in funding from the Industrial Research Assistance Program (“IRAP”) and $187,427 in Scientific Research and Experimental Development ("SR&ED") tax credits), $398,431 of professional fees and $889,770 of wages and benefits.

B. Business overview

Business Strategy

The following outlines the Company’s strategy prior to the completion of the Fundamental Change Transaction.

Prior to the Fundamental Change Transaction, the Company was focused on combing, reformulating and repurposing approved drugs. It was initially developing drugs for diseases of progressive excessive scarring, including Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis, Liver Cirrhosis, Pulmonary Fibrosis associated with Scleroderma and Post Lung Transplant Bronchiolitis Obliterans. The Company assumed the clinical, regulatory and commercial development activities of its product candidates and advanced them through the regulatory and clinical pathways toward commercial approval. This strategy reduced the risk, time and cost of developing therapies for Fibrosis by avoiding the risks associated with basic research and using compounds with unknown safety and toxicity. The Company leveraged its expertise to manage and perform critical steps in drug development including the design and conduct of clinical trials, the development and execution of intellectual property strategies, the recruitment and selection of development partners and the interaction with drug regulatory authorities.

Its strategy included reformulating approved drugs to increase efficacy and patient compliance, and completing the further clinical testing, manufacturing and other regulatory requirements sufficient to seek marketing authorizations via the filing of a New Drug Application (“NDA”) with the FDA and/or a potential Marketing Application Authorization (“MAA”) with the European Medicines Evaluation Agency (“EMEA”) or similar marketing authorizations by regulators in other countries including Canada.

The main elements of the Company’s strategy prior to the Fundamental Change Transaction were as follows:

17

1) Identification of Product Candidates

The Company performed scientific evaluations and market assessments of drugs and drug combinations and research from academics and other drug development companies. As part of this process, the Company evaluated the clinical and pre-clinical research and the intellectual property rights associated with the potential products and researched to determine the commercial potential of the product candidate.

The Company worked to mitigate the risks associated with development and commercialization of drug candidates by targeting drug candidates that:

• are combinations of already approved compounds;

• have well established safety records;

• have potential to be reformulated to a once a day oral dose;

• have potential to be reformulated to an oral dissolving technology;

• are already marketed in countries other than the United States or Europe; and

• have pre-clinical animal data or clinical data of potential efficacy in Fibrosis additional indications.

The Company had initially focused on Fibrosis indications as it believes there is a large unmet medical need in this area. As an example, Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis (IPF) affects more than 130,000 Americans (IPF Summit 2011). An estimated 48,000 cases of IPF are diagnosed annually (Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2006;174(7):810-816). In addition, patients with IPF have poor prognosis; an estimated 40,000 people die each year from IPF. Further, there are no FDA approved treatments for IPF (IPF Summit 2011).

The Company has developed the Scientific and Advisory Board (“SAB”) to support this strategy. The members of both of this group are very experienced in the clinical development of drug candidates for Pulmonary Fibrosis, lung transplant, airway disease and Scleroderma. In the future, the Company may develop product candidates for other indications but the current strategy is to leverage the expertise and skills the Company has in Fibrosis, particularly Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis.

2) In-licensing

In identifying a promising product candidate, the Company sought to negotiate a license to the rights for the candidate from the holder of those rights. Typically the goal was to secure licenses that permit the Company to conduct further research, development and clinical trials as well as engage in additional intellectual property protection. The Company also sought terms that provide it with the rights to further licensing of manufacturing and marketing rights to any resulting products. This process is known as in-licensing.

3) Product Development

Upon securing the appropriate rights to the product candidate, the Company intended to advance the candidate through the regulatory and commercialization pathways for marketing approval in major markets. This process was intended to include implementing intellectual property strategies, formulation and reformulation strategies, making regulatory submissions, conducting or managing clinical trials, and performing or managing the collection, collation and interpretation of clinical and field data and the submission of this data to relevant regulatory authorities.

4) Partnering

To enhance its capabilities to develop and market its product candidates, the Company left open the possibility of entering into agreements or partnerships with companies that have formulation, drug development, sales or marketing expertise, or all of the above.

5) Outsourcing

In order to optimize return on investment and the development of product candidates, the Company used a virtual company business model which included outsourcing all non-core business activities. Factors that the Company considered to determine core and non-core activities included:

• Infrastructure cost

• Operating cost

• Frequency of use

18

• Regulatory protocol

• Requirement for third party verification

• Capacity

• Quality control

Management has determined that having its own laboratory and staff for conducting infrequent pre-clinical studies is not a core capacity that is required and, therefore, it has to develop relationships with labs that it may outsource this work to. In order to maintain quality control, these projects are managed very closely by the Company’s staff and the Company develops all protocols for the completion of this work. Other functions the Company has decided to outsource include analytical assay development, formulation, clinical trials and manufacturing. It is currently more cost-effective to outsource these tasks due to the Company’s sporadic requirements. As these requirements become less sporadic the Company may develop internal capabilities to complete currently outsourced tasks.

6) Principal Products

• PTL-202

Prior to the Fundamental Change Transaction, the Company’s lead product candidate was PTL-202, which was a combination of drugs that have been separately approved for marketing by the FDA for sale in the United States. In animal trials, the combination was more effective than either of its components at reducing indicators of Fibrosis. The Company was planning to complete development of a once a day pill of the combination using proprietary in licensed technologies. The Company conducted a drug/drug interaction study in 2012 and plans to conduct a bioequivalence study in 2013 with PTL-202 in humans.

The Company found a combination of two compounds developed in France that showed efficacy in human Fibrosis. The efficacy of this combination to prevent further Fibrosis in humans was confirmed in two separate independent proofs of principal Phase 2 clinical trials in Radiation Induced Fibrosis. The Company took one of the compounds, Pentoxifylline, and combined it with a powerful antioxidant and then conducted experiments in a mouse. These experiments showed that the new combination was effective at reducing the progression of the Fibrosis in the mouse lung. This new combination was being developed as the Company’s lead drug candidate, PTL-202. A provisional patent was filed in the United States by the Company in October 2007 to cover the composition of matter and method of use of this combination. In October 2008, the Company filed an application under the Patent Cooperation Treaty based on the above provisional application. The Company received a positive preliminary examination of the PCT application in the spring of 2009. During 2012 the patent prosecution continued and the Company filed Reponses to patent examiners in Europe and the US.

The combination has now been formulated into a once a day tablet and the drugs included in PTL-202 have been successfully tested in a drug/drug interaction study in humans in 2012.

• PTL-303

The Company’s other product candidate was PTL-303, which was a combination of drugs including one that has been approved for use in Japan and other jurisdictions. The Company believed that Tthis combination may have had a wide range of uses, including treating, preventing and reducing disorders of progressive scarring in humans.

The Company does not have any funds allocated for the further development of PTL-303 at this time.

The composition, including a cytokine modifier and anti-oxidant which is a precursor of Glutathione, was investigated for its antifibrotic activity by employing two In Vitro collagen synthesis assays. The Company discovered that the combination PTL-303 brings about substantial synergistic anti-fibrotic effects in a TGF-Beta1 mediated collagen synthesis assay, when compared to the individual drugs.

The composition can be administered in any convenient manner, such as a pill, or inhalation, and may be formulated for injection.

A provisional patent titled “Composition and Method for Treating Fibrosis” was filed by the Company with the United States patent office on October 29, 2008. The application number is 61/109,446. A PCT application covering the technology of PTL-303 was filed by the Company in October 2009.

19

7) Oral Dissolving Technology

The Company has executed a letter of intent with Globe Labs Ltd. of Vancouver, BC for the potential in-license of an oral dissolving tablet technology. The technology may be used for the delivery of up to three different compounds. The initial use of the technology maybe for the delivery of sildenafil citrate for the treatment of erectile dysfunction.

Principal Products

The following were the Company’s principal products during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015:

1) PTL-202

Once a Day Formulation Combination of Pan-phosphodiesterase inhibitor, Pentoxifylline, with N-acetylcysteine

Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis (“IPF”) is a long term, progressive form of lung disease characterized by progressive buildup of scar tissue on the supporting framework (interstitium) of the lungs. The term Idiopathic is used only when the cause of the Fibrosis is unknown. Despite extensive investigation, the cause of IPF remains unknown. The disease involves abnormal and excessive deposition of scar tissue (Fibrosis) in the Pulmonary Interstitium (mainly the walls of the Alveoli) with minimal associated inflammation (Figure 1). The symptoms initially develop slowly. The most common symptom is progressive difficulty in breathing, but also includes dry cough.

Figure 1 - Human Airways

The Company’s lead product, PTL-202, is a combination of two compounds designed to treat IPF: Pentoxifylline (PTX) and NAC (N-acetylcysteine). The Company has completed pre-clinical studies on PTL-202, development of a pill that can be taken once a day and completed a drug/drug interaction study in humans in 2012. A pivotal bio-equivalency study is planned for 2013 and maybe followed by a Phase 2 Proof-of-Principle clinical trial beginning in 2014.

Therapeutic Approach

The combination of drugs in PTL-202 was intended to stop the progression of IPF by reducing the amount of several messenger molecules that are known to be associated with scarring. In addition, the combination has anti-oxidant properties that protect the lung cells from further damage caused by the Fibrosis.

PTX increases the diameter of blood vessels and enhances blood flow. PTX had been successfully and safely used for many years for treatment of vascular diseases such as cramping in the leg.

There is growing evidence that PTX is an anti-inflammatory and may inhibit scarring in the lung.

20

NAC (N-acetylcysteine), the second compound in the PTL-202 combination, had been shown in animals to prevent some of the effects of IPF, including the progressive deterioration of patients.

Pre-clinical Studies

The Company had conducted a number of pre-clinical studies using PTL-202 for the treatment of lung Fibrosis in a mouse. The Company believed that these studies show that PTL-202 had the potential to be a safe and effective treatment for IPF.

The Company conducted proof-of-concept animal studies to evaluate the relative efficacy of stand-alone or combination treatments of PTX and NAC in lung Fibrosis. In the initial experiment, wet lung weight was measured under various treatments. From this early experiment, it was determined that PTL-202 may be more effective than its separate components. In further pre-clinical experiments, PTL-202 treatment was more effective than either PTX or NAC alone on lung Fibrosis in mice. In addition, treatment with PTL-202 caused a significant reduction in TNF-alpha in the lung fluid. This finding indicates that PTL-202 may act by reducing the amount of TNF-alpha. TNF-alpha is thought to stimulate the formation of scar tissue. Moreover, there were no deaths or abnormal reactions with a daily administration of PTL-202 during the experiments, indicating a lack of side effects which is consistent with the data from earlier clinical trials in humans for PTX and NAC separately.

The results of these extensive pre-clinical studies suggested that PTL-202 may be safe and effective agent for the treatment of Pulmonary Fibrosis.

DEVELOPMENT PLANS OF PTL-202

Formulation Development

Prior to the Fundamental Change Transaction. the goal of the Company had been to develop a pill containing both drugs that only needed to be taken once per day. Existing, marketed, modified release versions of the drugs were to be evaluated as a simple daily or twice daily fixed dose combination formulation. The Company determined that given, the preliminary dose ranges/strengths of 600-1200mg of PTX combination with 600mg-1200mg NAC once a day, the physical size for an ingestible tablet was a barrier to success. Then current formulation of PTX, with Vitamin E rather than NAC, in a Phase 2 study had shown inhibition of messenger molecules and a reduction in scar tissue. Both PTX and NAC are water soluble molecules, with short resident time in the bloodstream. This high water solubility presents a challenge to once-a-day administration as both molecules are rapidly absorbed and metabolized quickly by the body. The goal from a development perspective was to deliver an appropriately formulated controlled release product, reducing the absolute amount of drug per tablet needed to achieve a clinically effective blood level. The Company determined that to accomplish this goal, formulation development prototypes will need target release of the drugs to provide sustained levels of the drug in the blood.

A controlled release formulation of PTL-202, a fixed dose combination of pentoxifylline (PTX) and N-acetylcysteine (NAC), for the potential treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), Liver Cirrhosis and other fibrotic diseases was completed in 2012.

Phase 1: Clinical Studies

The Company completed the initial clinical study of PTL-202. The study was a drug/drug interaction study. This study, conducted in humans was intended to determine if any new by products are created by the combination of the drugs in PTL-202 and to determine if the combination is bio-equivalent to its generic counter parts. The study included 12 healthy males. The bio-analytical portion (PK assay development and good laboratory practice validation) of the above-mentioned study was completed by a lab contracted by the Company. Therefore, following the Company’s stated business strategy, the Company acted as a sponsor of the study and the CROs were hired to execute the objectives of the study. Successful completion of this Phase 1 study of PTL-202 is a major milestone because as many as 30% of Phase 1 drug trials are failures.

Phase 2: Proof- of-Concept in Humans

The proposed Phase 2 study was a proof-of-concept or proof-of-relevance trial. The proof-of-concept trial was intended to be designed to assess the safety and efficacy of PTL-202 in patients with IPF. Study patients were intended to receive formulated PTL-202 or individual components of PTL-202. Neither the patient or the physician were expected to know if they are getting PTL-202 or a component.

The objectives of the study were:

21

• To evaluate the safety and tolerability of 12 months of treatment with PTL-202 in patients with IPF versus placebo and individual components of PTL-202 (PTX and NAC);

• To compare changes in forced vital volume capacity in IPF patients treated with PTL-202 versus treatment with PTX and NAC alone and placebo;

• To compare changes in the following parameters in IPF patients treated with PTL-202;

• Diffusion capacity for carbon monoxide;

• Extent and nature of IPF-related abnormalities on high resolution CT; and

• To compare quality of life evaluations in IPF patients treated with PTL-202 and individual components of PTL- 202 versus placebo.

The cost to complete the Phase 2 study was estimated at $8 million. The Company expected that additional funds would be required to complete this phase of the development of PTL-202. On completion of this proof-of-principal study the Company had planned to look to out-license PTL-202 to a larger company capable of completing the development and commercialization of PTL-202. Such additional funds were expected to be raised through a private placement of securities.

2) PIPELINE PRODUCT: PTL-303

Fixed Dose Combination of TGF-β Inhibitor and NAC - Pre-clinical

The Company had completed In Vitro studies of this combination that have confirmed the compounds method of action. This data had been included in the provisional patent application for PTL-303 to support the composition of matter and methods claims.

The Company did not have any funds allocated for the further development of PTL-303 as at December 31, 2015.

Pending the availability of funds, the Company had intended to initiate animal studies using lung Fibrosis in mice to generate additional data to assess the efficacy of PTL-303. The pre-clinical work was also expected to focus on the delivery of the compound to the liver and the efficacy of the compound in a liver Fibrosis model.

The Company believed that efficacy in the liver Fibrosis model would lead to further Investigational New Drug application (IND) enabling studies when funds were available.

Manufacturing

The Company had limited experience in, and does not own facilities for, manufacturing any products or product candidates. The Company, in partnership with IntelGenx Corp. (IntelGenx), had planned to utilize contract manufacturers to produce clinical supplies of any components of its products that are not commercially available. Although the Company intended to continue to rely on contract manufacturers to produce certain of its products for both clinical and commercial supplies, the Company and IntelGenx anticipated oversee the production of those products.

Sales, Marketing and Distribution

The Company currently has no sales or distribution capabilities and limited marketing capabilities. In order to commercialize its products, the Company determined that it had to develop sales, marketing and distribution capabilities or make arrangements with other parties to perform these services for us. The Company’s intention was to out-license its products once Phase 2 testing has been completed. It was anticipated the licensee will have the capability to market, sell and distribute the Company’s products.

Intellectual Property

The Company believed that they were developing a valuable portfolio of intellectual property rights to protect the technologies, inventions and improvements that the Company believed were significant to the Company’s business, which includes patent applications in the United States, Europe and Canada.

The Company believed that its success in the specialty pharmaceutical industry depended on substantial part on effective management of both intellectual property assets and infringement risks. In particular, the company believed that it must be able to protect its own intellectual property as well as minimize the risk that any of our products infringes on the intellectual property rights of others.

22

The Company entered into agreements with all its employees involved in research and development, under which all intellectual property during their employment belongs to us, and they waive all relevant rights or claims to such intellectual property. All our employees involved in research and development were also bound by a confidentiality obligation, and had agreed to disclose and assign to us all inventions conceived by them during their term of employment. The Company acknowledged that despite measures it may take to protect its intellectual property, unauthorized parties may attempt to copy aspects of our products or our proprietary technology or to obtain and use information that we regard as proprietary.

The Company had filed the below patent:

Patent Cooperation Treaty Patent Application No. PCT/CA2008/001880
Filed 23 October 2008
COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR TREATING FIBROPROLIFERATIVE DISORDERS

The patent is filed under the Patent Cooperation Treaty in Canada, the United States and Europe.

Specialized Skills and Knowledge

All aspects of the Company’s business required specialized skills and knowledge. Such skills and knowledge included pre-clinical research, clinical drug development, regulatory, intellectual property management, business development, licensing, legal, corporate finance and accounting. Below is a list of the Company’s consultants and advisors during the year ended December 31, 2015.

Dr. Lola Maksumova MD, PhD - Consultant, Former VP of Drug Development Dr. Maksumova joined the Company in June 2007 as Vice President of Drug Development and held that position until November 2008. She rejoined the Company as a part time consultant in January 2009. Dr. Maksumova brings many years of bio-medical research experience, an understanding of disease processes in the areas of inflammation and Fibrosis, and expertise in cell signaling of immune disorders. Prior to her current position, Dr. Maksumova worked as Senior Scientist with Chemokine Therapeutics. Dr. Maksumova is a co-inventor of PTL-202 and PTL-303. Dr. Maksumova earned her medical degree from Tashkent Medical School and PhD in Medical Biochemistry from Hamamatsu University School of Medicine, Japan. Her professional training includes post-doctoral fellowships at Virginia Mason Research center in Seattle (2001) and with the Faculty of Medicine at University of British Columbia (2002-2006). Dr. Maksumova is compensated on an hourly basis for the time she spends consulting for the Issuer.

Scientific Advisory Board (“SAB”)

The members of the Company’s strategic advisory board, none of whom were officers or employees, provide advice, assistance and consultation in the fields of drug development, clinical trials and Fibrosis. The SAB consisted of clinical advisors considered to be known opinion leaders in their respective fields, and they offer the Company advice and feedback regarding the following:

• the Company’s drug development programs;

• the opportunities provided by unmet needs and market opportunities; and

• the existence of new products and technologies among other things.

The following is a brief biography of each of the Company’s Pulmonary Fibrosis and Bronchiolitis Obliterans clinical advisors, which includes a description of each individual’s credentials and recent professional experience.

Daryl Knight, Ph.D. Dr. Darryl Knight is a professor at University of Newcastle, Australia. Dr. Knight obtained his PhD at the University of Western Australia in 1993 and did post-doctoral training at the University of British Columbia. From 1997 to 2001 he was a Senior Research Officer in the Asthma & Allergy Research Institute of the University of Western Australia and was Head of the Experimental Biology division of the Institute from 2002 to 2004. He was also an Adjunct Senior Lecturer in the Department of Medicine at the University of Western Australia. Dr. Daryl Knight was the Canada Research Chair in Airway Disease and Associate Director of the James Hogg iCAPTURE Centre for Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Research. He was a tenured Professor of Pharmacology and Therapeutics at the University of British Columbia, Vancouver. Dr Knight sits on the Respiratory Science Grant Review panel at the CIHR, the Basic Science Review Panel of the Canadian Lung Association and is on the editorial board of 5 Respiratory Journals.

Ganesh Raghu MD, FCCP, FACP Dr. Ganesh Raghu MD, FCCP, FACP is a specialist in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis (IPF). He is a professor of Pulmonary Medicine at the University Of Washington Medical Centre and a Director of the Lung transplant program there. He has conducted several clinical trials for the treatment of IPF with antifibrotic drugs.

23

His current research interests include quality of life measures in IPF and lung transplantation, as well as the treatment of rejection and infection in lung transplants. Dr. Raghu received his M.D. in 1973 from Mysore Medical College, University of Mysore, Mysore, India. He Interned at University Hospitals, University of Mysore in 1974 and was a resident in General Medicine and Chest Medicine, Hartlepool General Hospital and Postgraduate Medical Center (University of Newcastle Upon Tyne), Hartlepool, England in 1977. In 1980 he conducted his residency in Internal Medicine at State University of New York in Buffalo. He was the Chief Medical Resident at the State University of New York, Buffalo from 1980 to 1981. Dr. Raghu moved to Seattle in 1983 to complete fellowships in Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine as well as Lung Cell Biology at the University of Washington.

Dr. Andreas Zuckermann, MD Dr. Zuckermann’s specialties include heart and lung transplantation. He is a Staff Surgeon in the Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery at University of Vienna in Austria and Co-Director of the Cardiac Transplantation Program there. He is also a Director the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation. He has been involved in over 170 thoracic transplantations and has conducted clinical research in post-transplant patients. His current interests are focused on heart lung transplantation and beating heart transplants. Dr. Zuckermann received his MD from Vienna Medical School, University of Vienna in 1991. From 1991 – 1993 he was the transplant coordinator in the Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery at the University of Vienna. From 1993 to 2000 prior to his appointment as a Staff Surgeon he trained in Cardio-thoracic surgery at St. Polten Hospital in Vienna where he assisted in over 30 lung transplants.

James R. Seibold, MD, FACP, FACR Dr. Seibold is the past Director of the Scleroderma Program University of Michigan. He had been on the faculty of UMDNJ from 1980-2004 where he had served as Chief of the Division of Rheumatology, Director of the Clinical Research Center and as the W.H. Conzen Chair of Clinical Pharmacology. Author of more than 300 scientific publications, his medical practice specializes in Scleroderma, Raynaud’s phenomenon and interventional research in the rheumatologic diseases. He has received multiple awards from arthritis and Scleroderma patient organizations. Dr. Seibold is currently the President of the Scleroderma Clinical Trials Consortium.

Competitive Conditions

Current Therapies for Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis

In North America the current therapy for Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis is based on the premise that recruitment and activation of inflammatory cells leads to the progressive development of IPF. However, massive doses of immunosuppressive agents meant to decrease the number or activity of inflammatory cells do not alter the development of IPF. Instead, patients develop serious side effects leading to a shortened lifespan. Since the current therapy is not successful, there is an urgent need to develop alternative potent, non-toxic, long lasting therapy for these unmet medical needs. PTL-202 works by inhibiting messenger molecules that are active in the development of IPF, specifically TNF-alpha.

Until recently treatment for IPF in North America consists of using immunosuppressants and anti-oxidants. In an attempt to minimize side effects many patients are prescribed drugs to prevent GI side effects, osteoporosis and infection. A clinical study during 2012 concluded that this treatment using immunosuppressants was actually harmful to IPF patients. Supplemental oxygen is prescribed to patients who are unable to maintain a satisfactory amount of oxygen in the blood. This treatment remains unsatisfactory as the median survival is 2 – 4 years once diagnosis is made and the 5 year survival rate ranges from 20% – 40% (Olson AL, Swigris JJ, Lezotte DC, Norris JM, Wilson CG, Brown KK. “Mortality from pulmonary fibrosis increased in the United States from 1992 to 2003”. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2007;176(3):277-284).

InterMune Inc.’s (“InterMune”) Pirfenidone represents the most advanced therapy being developed to treat IPF. Pirfenidone is a synthetic small molecule that is orally available for the prevention of fibrotic lesions in general. Pirfenidone has gastrointestinal side effects and will darken the skin and cover from the sun is required with its use. In contrast to PTL-202, Pirfenidone works by reducing the activity of an enzyme.

Both InterMune and Shinogi & Co., Ltd. (“Shinogi”) have conducted Phase 3 trials of Pirfenidone to treat IPF. InterMune has recently received approval to market Pirfenidone for IPF in the European Union and Canada, Shinogi recently received approval to market Pirfenidone for IPF in Japan. Pirfenidone is currently undergoing clinical trials for uterine fibrosis (PhII), scleroderma (PhII), proliferative vitreoretinopathy (PhII), multiple sclerosis (PhII), liver fibrosis (PhII), wound healing (PhI), and benign prostatic hyperplasia (PhI). Pirfenidone is not approved for use in either the United States. There are no therapies for IPF approved in the United States.

Current Therapies for Scleroderma

Treatment of Scleroderma is directed toward the individual feature(s) affecting different areas of the body:

• Aggressive treatment of elevations in blood pressure have been extremely important in preventing kidney

24

failure;

• Blood-pressure medications, such as captopril, are frequently used; and

• Serious inflammation of the lungs (alveolitis) can require immune suppression with cyclophosphamide (Cytoxan) along with prednisone.

Additionally, medications are used to suppress the overly active immune system that seems to be spontaneously causing the disease in organs affected. Medications used for this purpose include penicillamine, azathioprine, and methotrexate. The optimal treatment of Scleroderma lung disease is an area of active research. Stem-cell transplantation is being explored as a possible option. There are no effective treatments for lung fibrosis associated with Scleroderma.

No medication has been found to be universally effective for all patients with scleroderma. In an individual patient, the illness may be mild and not require treatments. In some, the disease is ravaging and relentless. Lung fibrosis in Scleroderma may be fatal. PTL-202’s main focus in Scleroderma is treating patients with lung fibrosis.

Current Therapies for Post Lung Transplant Bronchiolitis Obliterans

The current therapy for Post Lung Transplant Bronchiolitis Obliterans (“PLT-BO”) is based on the same premise as in IPF, recruitment and activation of inflammatory cells leads to the development and progression of PLT-BO. However, massive doses of immunosuppressive agents meant to decrease the number or activity of inflammatory cells do not alter the course of IPF or PLT-BO. Instead, patients develop serious side effects leading to a shortened lifespan. There are no FDA-approved treatments for IPF. Despite these advances, optimal therapy for IPF remains elusive and has yet to be identified (http://www.ipfsummit.org/pdf/Needs-Assessment.pdf)

Competing IPF Drugs Currently Under Development

ACTIVE PHASE III CLINICAL TRIALS

• BIBF 1120 - Manufactured by Boehringer Ingelheim: A Phase III, double-blind trial in patients with PF to investigate the effect of Oral BIBF 1120, 150 mg Twice Daily, on Annual Forced Vital Capacity Decline. A primary outcome measure will be the annual rate of decline in in FVC over 32 weeks;

• Cyclosporine Inhalation Solution (CIS) - Manufactured by APT Pharmaceuticals - (For lung transplant recipients only): A Phase III multi-center, randomized, controlled study to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of cyclosporine inhalation solution (CIS) in Improving Bronchiolitis Obliterans Syndrome-Free Survival Following Lung Transplantation. The study seeks to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of CIS in improving survival, and preventing BOS when given prophylactically to lung transplant recipients in addition to their standard immunosuppressive regimen. The study is no longer recruiting patients;

• Pirfenidone - Manufactured by InterMune: A Phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the treatment effect of pirfenidone on change in a lung function measure (percent predicted forced vital capacity, or %FVC) and to evaluate the safety of treatment with pirfenidone compared with placebo; and

• Thalomid (Thalidomide) - Manufactured by Celgene: A Phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled safety and efficacy study investigating the Treatment of Chronic Cough in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis with Thalidomide. Please visit www.clinicaltrials.gov and search "IPF" for a complete description of this trial, including inclusion/exclusion criteria. The study is sponsored by Johns Hopkins Medical Center (Baltimore, MD).

ACTIVE PHASE II CLINICAL TRIALS

• CNTO 888 (Manufactured by Centocor, Inc.): A Phase 2, Multicenter, Multinational, Randomized, Double- Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Parallel-Group, Dose-Ranging Study Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of CNTO
  888 Administered Intravenously. The primary objective is to determine the efficacy (as measured by pulmonary function) and safety of CNTO 888 in patients with IPF. The secondary outcome measures are to assess the effect of CNTO 888 on measures of disease progression, patient reported outcomes, functional capacity and health-related quality of life, and to assess the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of CNTO 888 in IPF. The study began recruiting patients in October, 2008, with a goal of recruiting 120 patients. Patients will be in the study for about 74 weeks;

• FG-3019 (Manufactured by FibroGen, Inc.): A Phase II study of FG-3019 (therapeutic antibody against connective tissue growth factor) for patients with IPF. The study is a Phase 2a, Open-Label, Single Arm Study to Evaluate the Safety, Tolerability, and Efficacy of FG-3019 in Subjects With Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis;

• Interferon alpha (Amarillo Biosciences): A Phase II, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to determine whether interferon-alpha, delivered in low doses via orally dissolving lozenges given 3 times per day

25

for 4 weeks, can reduce the frequency and severity of chronic cough in patients with COPD or IPF. Cough frequency will be assessed via 24-hour digital audio recordings made prior to entry, and at weeks 2 and 4 of treatment. Patients will also complete questionnaires regarding cough frequency, duration and intensity, QOL, dyspnea, and antitussive medication usage weekly during treatment. The study is seeking 80 patients however it is only recruiting patients at Texas Tech University (Lubbock, TX). THIS IS TEMPORARILY ON HOLD; and

• STX-100 (Stromedix, Inc.): STX-100 is a monoclonal antibody being developed for the treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). This multi-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study will evaluate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of STX-100 in patients with IPF. The study began recruitment in Q4 11 and will enroll patients at sites across the United States.

ACTIVE PHASE I CLINICAL TRIALS

• GS 6624 (formerly AB0024) - Developed by Gilead Sciences, Inc. Phase 1 drug candidate (humanized monoclonal antibody targeting the human LOXL2 protein) for patients with IPF. An ongoing Phase 1 study is designed to evaluate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of GS 6624 in adult patients with IPF;

• IW001 - Manufactured by Immuneworks. A Phase I study of the safety and tolerability of 3 doses of IW001 per day in patients with IPF over a 24 week treatment period. To explore the biologic effects of IW001 on T-cell and B-cell reactivity. This study will also explore relationships between Collagen V reactivity and clinical measures of lung function in patients with IPF. This study is now recruiting; and

• PRM-151 - Manufactured by Promedior, Inc. A Phase 1b study of the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of IV PRM-151 in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis has initiated in the US and the Netherlands. This study is now recruiting patients. PRM-151 is being developed for potential therapeutic uses to prevent, treat, and reduce fibrosis in a number of disease settings.

Economic Dependence

The Company’s business was substantially dependent on its own patent applications to use intellectual property protected by patent, trade secret and know-how owned by the Company.

The Company’s business was substantially dependent on contracts to purchase the major part of its requirements for research and development services for the development of assays, formulation, pre-clinical research, clinical research and/or raw materials and manufactured product upon which its business depends. The Company expects that its business will be affected in the current financial year by the negotiation of new contracts and renegotiation or termination of contracts or sub-contracts.

Seasonality

Not Applicable

Insurance

The Company maintained commercial general liability insurance coverage to cover product liability claims arising from the use of its products. We also maintained liability insurance to cover specific clinical trials risks.

The Company also provides directors’ and officers’ liability and company reimbursement insurance to cover all of our directors and officers against losses arising from claims it indemnifies for. Our current officers and directors insurance coverage expired on July 22, 2015 and was subsequently renewed upon its expiration.

Facilities

See Item 4D, “Information on the Company — Property, Plant and Equipment.”

Regulation

Government Regulations

The current and future operations and research and development activities of the Company are or will be subject to various laws and regulations in the countries in which the Company conducts or plans to conduct activities, including but not limited to the United States, Canada and the European Union. These laws and regulations govern the research, development, sale and

26

marketing of pharmaceuticals, taxes, labor standards, occupational health and safety, toxic substances, chemical products and materials, waste management and other matters relating to the pharmaceutical industry. Permits, registrations or other authorizations may also be required to maintain operations and to carry out the Company’s future research and development activities, and these permits, registrations or authorizations will be subject to revocation, modification and renewal.

Governmental authorities have the power to enforce compliance with lease conditions, regulatory requirements and the provisions of required permits, registrations or other authorizations, and violators may be subject to civil and criminal penalties including fines, injunctions, or both. The failure to obtain or maintain a required permit may also result in the imposition of civil and criminal penalties, and third parties may have the right to sue to enforce compliance.

The Company expects to be able to comply with all applicable laws and regulations and does not believe that such compliance will have a material adverse effect on its competitive position. The Company has obtained and intends to obtain all permits, licenses and approvals required by all applicable regulatory agencies to maintain current operations and to carry out future research and development activities.

U.S. Pharmaceutical Regulatory Agency

Regulation by governmental authorities in the United States and other countries is a significant factor in the development, manufacture and marketing of pharmaceuticals. All of the Company’s product candidates will require regulatory approval by government agencies prior to commercialization. In particular, product candidates are subject to rigorous pre-clinical testing and clinical trials and other premarketing approval requirements of the FDA and regulatory authorities in other countries. Various federal, state and foreign statutes and regulations govern the manufacturing, safety, labeling, storage, record-keeping and marketing of pharmaceutical products. The lengthy process of seeking required approvals and the continuing need for compliance with applicable statutes and regulations require the expenditure of substantial resources. When and if regulatory approval is obtained for any of the Company’s product candidates, the approval may be limited in scope, which may significantly limit the indicated uses for which the product candidates may be marketed, promoted and advertised. In addition, approved pharmaceuticals and manufacturers are subject to ongoing review and discovery of previously unknown problems that may result in restrictions on the manufacture, sale or use of approved pharmaceuticals or in their withdrawal from the market.

Pre-clinical Studies

Before testing any compounds with potential therapeutic value in human subjects in the United States, stringent governmental requirements for pre-clinical data must be satisfied. Pre-clinical testing includes both in vitro and in vivo laboratory evaluation and characterization of the safety and efficacy of a drug and its formulation. Pre-clinical testing results obtained from these studies, including tests in several animal species, are submitted to the FDA as part of an investigational new drug application, or IND, and are reviewed by the FDA prior to the commencement of human clinical trials. These pre-clinical data must provide an adequate basis for evaluating both the safety and the scientific rationale for the initial trials in human volunteers.

Clinical Trials

If a company wants to conduct clinical trials in the United States to test a new drug in humans, an IND must be prepared and submitted to the FDA. The IND becomes effective if not rejected or put on clinical hold by the FDA within 30 days of filing the application. The IND process can result in substantial delay and expense.

Clinical Trial Phases

Clinical trials typically are conducted in three sequential phases, Phases 1, 2 and 3, with Phase 4 trials potentially conducted after marketing approval. These phases may be compressed, may overlap or may be omitted in some circumstances.

• Phase 1 clinical trials: After an IND becomes effective, Phase 1 human clinical trials can begin. These trials evaluate a drug’s safety profile and the range of safe dosages that can be administered to healthy volunteers or patients, including the maximum tolerated dose that can be given to a trial subject. Phase 1 trials also determine how a drug is absorbed, distributed, metabolized and excreted by the body, and duration of its action.

• Phase 2 clinical trials: Phase 2 clinical trials are generally designed to establish the optimal dose, to evaluate the potential effectiveness of the drug in patients who have the target disease or condition and to further ascertain the safety of the drug at the dosage given in a larger patient population.

• Phase 3 clinical trials: In Phase 3 clinical trials, the drug is usually tested in a controlled, randomized trial comparing the investigational new drug to a control (which may be an approved form of therapy) in an

27

expanded and well-defined patient population and at multiple clinical sites. The goal of these trials is to obtain definitive statistical evidence of safety and effectiveness of the investigational new drug regime as compared to control in defined patient populations with a given disease and stage of illness.

New Drug Application

After completion of clinical trials, if there is substantial evidence that the drug is both safe and effective, a New Drug Application, is prepared and submitted for the FDA to review. The New Drug Application must contain all of the essential information on the drug gathered to that date, including data from pre-clinical studies and clinical trials, and the content and format of a New Drug Application must conform with all FDA regulations and guidelines. Accordingly, the preparation and submission of a New Drug Application is an expensive and major undertaking for a company.

The FDA reviews all New Drug Applications submitted before it accepts them for filing and may request additional information from the sponsor rather than accepting a New Drug Application for filing. In such an event, the New Drug Application must be submitted with the additional information and, again, is subject to review before filing. Once the submission is accepted for filing, the FDA begins an in-depth review of the New Drug Application. By law, the FDA has 180 days in which to review the New Drug Application and respond to the applicant. The review process is often significantly extended by the FDA through requests for additional information and clarification. The FDA may refer the application to an appropriate advisory committee, typically a panel of clinicians, for review, evaluation and a recommendation as to whether the application should be approved and the scope of any approval. The FDA is not bound by the recommendation, but gives great weight to it. If the FDA evaluations of both the New Drug Application and the manufacturing facilities are favorable, the FDA may issue either an approval letter or an approvable letter, which usually contains a number of conditions that must be satisfied in order to secure final approval. If the FDA’s evaluation of the New Drug Application submission or manufacturing facility is not favorable, the FDA may refuse to approve the New Drug Application or issue a not approvable letter.

Fast Track Designation and Priority Review

The FDA’s fast track program is intended to facilitate the development and expedite the review of drugs that are intended for the treatment of a serious or life-threatening condition for which there is no effective treatment and which demonstrate the potential to address unmet medical needs for their condition. Under the fast track program, the sponsor of a new drug may request the FDA to designate the drug for a specific indication as a fast track product at any time during the clinical development process.

In some cases, the FDA may designate a product for priority review. A product is eligible for priority review, or review within a targeted six-month time frame from the time a New Drug Application is accepted for filing, if the product provides a significant improvement compared to marketed products in the treatment, diagnosis or prevention of a disease. The Company regularly assesses its products for fast track potential but cannot guarantee any of its products will receive a priority review designation, or if a priority designation is received, that review or approval will be faster than conventional FDA procedures.

Orphan Drug Designation

The FDA may grant orphan drug designation to drugs intended to treat a rare disease or condition that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, such as IPF. If the FDA grants orphan drug designation, the generic identity of the therapeutic agent and its potential orphan use are disclosed publicly by the FDA. Orphan drug designation does not convey any advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the regulatory review and approval process. If a product that has orphan drug designation subsequently receives FDA approval for the indication for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan exclusivity, which means the FDA may not approve any other applications to market the same drug for the same indication, except in very limited circumstances, for up to seven years after receiving FDA approval.

When appropriate, the Company will seek orphan status for certain indications that may be treated with its products.

Other Regulatory Requirements

Any products manufactured or distributed under FDA approvals are subject to continuing regulation by the FDA, including record-keeping requirements and reporting of adverse experiences with the products. Drug manufacturers and their subcontractors are required to register with the FDA and, where appropriate, state agencies, and are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA and state agencies for compliance with current good manufacturing practices and regulations which impose procedural and documentation requirements upon drug developers and each third party manufacturer they utilize.

28

The FDA closely regulates the marketing and promotion of drugs. A company can make only those claims relating to safety and efficacy that are approved by the FDA. Failure to comply with these requirements can result in adverse publicity, warning letters, corrective advertising and potential civil and criminal penalties. Physicians may prescribe legally available drugs for uses that are not described in the product’s labeling and that differ from those tested by us and approved by the FDA. Such off-label uses are common across medical specialties. Physicians may believe that such off-label uses are the best treatment for many patients in varied circumstances. The FDA does not regulate the behavior of physicians in their choice of treatments. The FDA does, however, restrict manufacturers from communicating on the subject of off-label use.

European Union

Clinical Trials

In common with the United States, the various phases of pre-clinical and clinical research in the European Union are subject to significant regulatory controls. The regulatory controls on clinical research in the European Union are now largely harmonized following the implementation of the Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC, or CTD. Compliance with the national implementations of the CTD has been mandatory from May 1, 2004. However, variations in the member state review agencies continue to exist, particularly in the small number of member states that have yet to implement the CTD fully.

All member states currently require regulatory and independent ethics committee approval of interventional clinical trials. European regulators and ethics committees also require the submission of adverse event reports during a study and a copy of the final study report.

Marketing Authorization

In the European Union, approval of new medicinal products can be obtained through the mutual recognition procedure or the centralized procedure. The mutual recognition procedure entails initial assessment by the national authorities of a single member state and subsequent review by national authorities in other member states based on the initial assessment. The centralized procedure entails submission of a single Marketing Authorization Application (“MAA”) to the European Medicines Agency (“EMEA”) leading to an approval that is valid in all European Union member states. EMEA approval is required for certain medicinal products, such as biotechnology products and certain new chemical entities, and optional, or available at the EMEA’s discretion for other new chemical entities or innovative medicinal products with novel characteristics.

Under the centralized procedure, an MAA is submitted to the EMEA. Two European Union member states are appointed to conduct an initial evaluation of each MAA. These countries each prepare an assessment report, which are then used as the basis of a scientific opinion of the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (“CHMP”). If this opinion is favorable, it is sent to the European Commission which drafts a decision. After consulting with the member states, the European Commission adopts a decision and grants a marketing authorization, which is valid throughout the European Union and confers the same rights and obligations in each of the member states as a marketing authorization granted by that member state.

The European Union expanded its membership by ten in May 2004. Two more countries joined on January 1, 2007. Several other European countries outside of the European Union, particularly those intending to accede to the European Union, accept European Union review and approval as a basis for their own national approval.

Advertising

In the European Union, the promotion of prescription medicines is subject to intense regulation and control, including a prohibition on direct-to-consumer advertising. Some jurisdictions require that all promotional materials for prescription medicines be subjected to either prior internal or regulatory review and approval.

Data Exclusivity

For applications filed after October 30, 2005, European Union regulators offer eight years data exclusivity during which generic drug manufacturers cannot file abridged applications. This is followed by two years market exclusivity during which generic applications may be reviewed and approved but during which generic drug manufacturers cannot launch products.

Other Regulatory Requirements

29

If a marketing authorization is granted for the Company’s products in the European Union, the holder of the marketing authorization will be subject to ongoing regulatory obligations. A holder of a marketing authorization for the Company’s products is legally obliged to fulfill a number of obligations by virtue of its status as a Marketing Authorization Holder. While the associated legal responsibility and liability cannot be delegated, the Marketing Authorization Holder can delegate the performance of related tasks to third parties, provided that this delegation is appropriately documented. A Marketing Authorization Holder can therefore either ensure that it has adequate resources, policies and procedures to fulfill its responsibilities, or can delegate the performance of some or all of its obligations to others, such as distributors or marketing partners.

The obligations of a Marketing Authorization Holder include:

• Manufacturing and Batch Release: Marketing Authorization Holders should guarantee that all manufacturing operations comply with relevant laws and regulations, applicable good manufacturing practices, with the product specifications and manufacturing conditions set out in the marketing authorization and that each batch of product is subject to appropriate release formalities;

• Pharmaco-vigilance: Marketing Authorization Holders are obliged to monitor the safety of products post- approval and to submit to the regulators safety reports on an expedited and periodic basis. There is an obligation to notify regulators of any other information that may affect the risk benefit ratio for the product;

• Advertising and Promotion: Marketing Authorization Holders remain responsible for all advertising and promotion of its products in the relevant jurisdiction, including promotional activities by other companies or individuals on their behalf. Some jurisdictions require that a Marketing Authorization Holder subject all promotional materials to either internal or prior regulatory review and approval;

• Medical Affairs/Scientific Service: Marketing Authorization Holders are required to have a function responsible for disseminating scientific and medical information on its medicinal products, predominantly to healthcare professionals, but also to regulators and patients;

• Legal Representation and Distributor Issues: Marketing Authorization Holders are responsible for regulatory actions or inactions of their distributors and agents, including the failure of distributors to provide a Marketing Authorization Holder with safety data within a timeframe that allows the Marketing Authorization Holder to fulfill its reporting obligations; and

• Preparation, Filing and Maintenance of the Application and Subsequent Marketing Authorization: Marketing Authorization Holders have general obligations to maintain appropriate records, to comply with the marketing authorization’s terms and conditions, to submit renewal applications and to pay all appropriate fees to the authorities. There are also general reporting obligations, such as an obligation to inform regulators of any information that may lead to the modification of the marketing authorization dossier or product labeling, and of any action to suspend, revoke or withdraw an approval or to prohibit or suspend the marketing of a product.

The Company may hold marketing authorizations for products in its own name, or appoint an affiliate or a collaboration partner to hold the marketing authorization on its behalf. Any failure by a Marketing Authorization Holder to comply with these obligations may result in regulatory action against the Marketing Authorization Holder and its approvals and ultimately threaten our ability to commercialize our products.

Canada

In Canada, applications for a marketing authorization, known as a notice of compliance, are submitted to the Health Canada Therapeutic Products Directorate, which is the federal regulatory body that oversees the approval of pharmaceutical products for human use. Under the Food and Drugs Act (Canada) and the regulations there under, a manufacturer must present substantive scientific evidence of a product’s safety, efficacy and quality. At present, Health Canada targets 355 days for application review and approvals. Once the application is approved and the applicant receives a notice of compliance, the applicant has the right to sell the product in Canada.

In addition to regulations in the United States, Europe and Canada, the Company is subject to a variety of foreign regulations governing clinical trials and commercial distribution of our future product candidates in other jurisdictions.

Approvals Outside of the United States, Canada and the European Union

30

The Company and its products will also be subject to a wide variety of foreign regulations governing development, manufacture and marketing. Whether or not FDA approval or European marketing authorization has been obtained, approval of a product by the comparable regulatory authorities of other foreign countries must still be obtained prior to manufacturing or marketing the product in those countries. The approval process varies from country to country and the time needed to secure approval may be longer or shorter than that required for FDA approval or a European marketing authorization. The Company cannot assure investors that clinical trials conducted in one country will be accepted by other countries or that approval in one country will result in approval in any other country.

Seasonality

Not Applicable

Legal Proceedings

We are not currently a party to any material legal proceeding. From time to time, we may bring against others or be subject to various claims and legal actions arising in the ordinary course of business

C. Organizational structure

Not Applicable.

D. Property, plant and equipment.

As we operated as a virtual company and we had no products approved for marketing, and no research and development facilities or manufacturing plant, we therefore had no PP&E relating to manufacturing equipment at the time of the 2015 Form 20-F. However, we did have minimal amounts of lab equipment, computer equipment, furniture and fixtures and leasehold improvements relating to our head office. See the financial statements for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015 included in this Form 20-F. Our head office is located at 600-535 Howe Street, Vancouver, BC V6C 2Z4 Canada. We currently lease this office location.

trials and commercialize the Company’s drug candidates worldwide.

General and Administrative Expenses

General and administrative costs consist primarily of personnel related costs, non-intellectual property related legal costs, accounting costs and other professional and administrative costs associated with general corporate activities.

General and administrative costs consist primarily of personnel related costs, non-intellectual property related legal costs, accounting costs and other professional and administrative costs associated with general corporate activities.

During the year ended December 31, 2015, the total general and administrative costs were $27,865 as compared to the year ended December 31, 2014 during which period the total general and administrative costs were $202,809. The decreased loss is largely due to a decrease in advertising and promotion of $45,537, investor relations of $25,075 and professional fees of $83,004 in the year ended December 31, 2015 as compared to the year ended December 31, 2014.

The Company expected that as PTL-202 began clinical development and as operations are developed to move PTL-202 and other drug candidates through the clinical trial process, general and administrative expenses would increase and increases in personnel costs, professional fees and contract services would make up a significant portion of these planned expenditures.

Intellectual Property and Intangible Assets

All license and option fees paid to licensors for intellectual property licenses are accrued to intangible assets on the Company’s financial statements. In addition, any expenses for intellectual property protection including patent lawyers services fees and any filing fees with government agencies or the World Intellectual Property Organization are accrued to intangible assets.

Interest Income

Interest income consists of interest earned on the Company’s cash and cash equivalents. There was interest income in 2015 of $Nil (2014- $Nil, 2013 – $16,861).

Profits

At the time of the 2015 Form 20-F, the Company was not anticipating profit from operations. Until such time as the Company is able to realize profits from the out licensing of products under development, the Company will report an annual deficit and will rely on its ability to obtain equity and/or debt financing to fund on-going operations. For information concerning the business of the Company, please see “Item 4. Information on the Company”.

Contributed Surplus, which arises from the recognition of the estimated fair value of stock options and warrants, was $121,939 for fiscal year 2015, compared with $289,766 for fiscal year 2014 and $123,704 for fiscal year 2013. The decrease in contributed surplus was due to options and warrant expired unexercised.

As a result of the net and comprehensive income (loss) for the fiscal year 2015 of $179,673 (compared with ($693,645) for fiscal year 2014 and ($740,846) for fiscal year 2013), the deficit as of December 31, 2015 increased to $3,537,239 from $3,955,537 as of December 31, 2014, for a decrease of $418,298. The deficit as of December 31, 2014 increased to $3,955,537 from $3,263,058 as of December 31, 2013, for an increase of $692,479.

During the fiscal year 2015, the Company’s net cash provided by financing activities increased to $165,376, compared with $197,785 for fiscal year 2014 and $731,273 for fiscal year 2013.

At the time of the 2015 Form 20-F, the Company’s operations did not generate cash inflows and its financial success after 2012 was dependent on management’s ability to continue to obtain sufficient funding to sustain operations through the development stage and successfully bring the Company’s technologies to the point that they may be out licensed so that the Company achieves profitable operations.

32

.

Comparison of Years Ended December 31, 2015 and 2014

Critical Accounting Estimates

The Company’s accounting policies are presented in Note 3 of the December 31, 2012 audited financial statements. The preparation of financial statements in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) requires management to select accounting policies and make estimates. Such estimates may have a significant impact on the financial statements. Actual amounts could differ materially from the estimates used and, accordingly, affect the results of the operations. These include:

33

• the assumptions used for the determinations of the timing of future income tax events;

• the carrying values of property, plant and equipment, intangible assets such as technology licenses and patents, derivative liability, convertible note, and the valuation of stock-based compensation expense.

Changes in Accounting Policies including Initial Adoption

The Company has adopted IFRS, as of January 1, 2010, as discussed in Note 2(a) of the December 31, 2014 Financial Statements.

Financial Instruments

The Company’s financial instruments consisted of cash and cash equivalents, accounts payable and accrued liabilities, amounts due to shareholders, shareholder demand loan, the liability portion of the convertible note and the derivative liability. Cash and cash equivalents are classified as financial assets. Unless otherwise noted, it is management’s opinion that the Company is not exposed to significant interest, currency or credit risks arising from financial instruments. The fair value of cash and cash equivalents and accounts payable and accrued liabilities approximates their carrying values due to their short-term maturity or capacity for prompt liquidation.

Accounts payable and accrued liabilities, amounts due to shareholders, shareholder demand loan, the liability portion of the convertible note and the derivative liability are classified as financial liabilities. Accounts payable and accrued liabilities, shareholder demand loan, balances due to shareholder and the liability portion of the convertible note are recognized initially at fair value, and subsequently stated at amortized cost. The derivative financial liability is initially measured at fair value, with subsequent measurement to fair value at the end of each reporting period.

Foreign exchange risk is the risk arising from changes in foreign currency fluctuations. The Company does not use any derivative instruments to reduce its exposure to fluctuations in foreign currency rates. It is the opinion of management that the foreign exchange risk to which the Company is exposed is minimal.

As of December 31, 2015, the Company had cash and cash equivalents of $nil (compared with $1,513 for fiscal year 2014 and $180,692 for fiscal year 2013) and working capital of ($638,801) (compared with ($940,251) for fiscal year 2014 and ($502,500) for fiscal year 2013). Working capital is calculated as current assets less current liabilities.

Cash and cash equivalents decreased by $1,654 between fiscal year 2015 and fiscal year 2014 due to an increase in financing during the period.

Working Capital decreased by $330,840 from fiscal year 2015 to fiscal year 2014 due to the decrease in restricted cash from the irrevocable subscription agreements upon the cancellation of those agreements and a reclassification of amounts due to shareholders from non-current to current liabilities. Total liabilities only decreased by $318,970 for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015 when compared to the total liabilities for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014.

Operating Activities

Cash utilized in operating activities during fiscal year 2015 was $161,460 (compared with $366,769 for fiscal year 2014 and $546,866 for fiscal year 2013). The decrease in cash utilized in operations during fiscal year 2015 as compared to fiscal year 2014 was due to a decrease in advertising and promotion, research and development and investor relations. This increase was offset by a decrease in expenses for Professional Fees. The increase in cash utilized in operations during fiscal year 2015 as compared to fiscal year 2014 was due to a decrease in professional fees related to the company becoming a reporting Company. This increase in the fiscal year 2015 was offset by reductions in wages and benefits, travel, research and development, as well as computer expenses.

Investing Activities

Investing activities primarily include additions to fixed assets and intangible assets. Net cash used in investing activities was 5,570, $10,195, and $13,569 in fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively.

Financing Activities

The Company’s cash inflows from financing activities comprised proceeds from common share issuances, warrants and warrant exercises for cash during fiscal year ended December 31, 2015 totaling $165,376. The Company’s cash inflows from financing activities comprised proceeds from common share issuances, warrant exercises, re-pricing of shares for cash and cash subscriptions received under the terms of the irrevocable subscription agreements during fiscal year ended December 31, 2014 totaling $197,785, compared with $731,273 for fiscal year ended December 31, 2013. Cash from financing activities decreased by $32,409 between fiscal year 2014 and fiscal year 2013 and increased by $533,488 between fiscal year 2014 and fiscal year 2013.

Capital Expenditures

Capital expenditures include $nil to acquire laboratory equipment in 2015, $Nil in 2014 and $Nil in 2013.

There were no capital expenditures during the quarters ended December 31, 2015 or 2014.

C. Research and Development

Research and development expense consisted primarily of salaries for management of research contracts and research contracts for pre-clinical studies, clinical studies and assay development as well as the development of clinical trial protocols and application to government agencies to conduct clinical trials, including consulting services fees related to regulatory issues and business development expenses related to the identification and evaluation of new drug candidates. Research and development costs are expensed as they are incurred.

Comparison of Years Ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013

From inception through to December 31, 2011, the Company incurred total expenses in the development of its intellectual property of $1,836,405, which includes $548,204 of research and development expenses (research and development expenses on the financial statements have been offset by $53,277 in IRAP funding and $187,427 in SR&ED tax credits), $398,431 of professional fees and $889,770 of wages and benefits.

From inception through to December 31, 2015, the Company incurred total expenses in the development of its intellectual property of $1,410,503, which includes $507,264 of research and development expenses (research and development expenses

35

on the financial statements have been offset by $53,277 in IRAP funding and $187,427 in SR&ED tax credits), $226,746 of professional fees and $676,493 of wages and benefits.

Additional financing will be required to complete the development and commercialize PTL-202. There is no assurance that such financing will be available or that the Company will have the capital to complete this proposed development and commercialization.

The Company was able to complete the formulation, drug/drug interaction study of PTL-202, analyzing the blood samples and analyzing the data from the drug/drug interaction trial in 2012 as planned. The Company’s clinical development studies and regulatory considerations relating to PTL-202 are subject to risks and uncertainties that may significantly impact its expense estimates and development schedules, including:

• the scope, rate of progress and cost of the development of PTL-202;

• uncertainties as to future results of the pivotal bio equivalency study of PTL-202;

• the Company’s ability to enroll subjects in clinical trials for current and future studies;

• the Company’s ability to raise additional capital; and

• the expense and timing of the receipt of regulatory approvals.

In addition to the formulation and clinical development plans for PTL-202 the Company may begin development of PTL-303 for the treatment of Liver Cirrhosis. The Company will only be able to begin development of PTL-303 if additional funds are available. There is no guarantee that these funds will be available to the Company and, if they are available, they may not be available on acceptable terms. Development of PTL-303 may significantly impact the Company’s expense projections and development timelines.

D. Trend Information

Other than as disclosed elsewhere in this 2015 Form 20-F, we were not aware of any trends, uncertainties, demands, commitments or events for the period from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2015 that were reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on our revenues, income, profitability, liquidity or capital resources, or that caused the disclosed financial information to be not necessarily indicative of future operating results or financial conditions.

E. Off Balance Sheet Arrangements

The Company is not a party to any off-balance sheet arrangements that have, or are reasonably likely to have, a current or future material effect on the Company’s financial condition, changes in financial condition, revenues, expenses, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures or capital resources.

F. Tabular Disclosure of Contractual Obligations

The Company has no known contractual obligations specified in Item 5.F.1 as of the latest fiscal year end balance sheet date.

The Company’s Audit Committee consisted of Robert Horsley, Brian Gusko and Christine Mah.

The Company’s Compensation Committee consisted of Robert Horsley, Brian Gusko and Christine Mah.

The following is a brief description of the background of the key management, directors and the promoters of the Company:

Robert Horsley

Mr. Robert “Nick” Horsley has over 10 years of public markets experience focused in finance, investor relations, marketing management and merger & acquisitions. Mr. Horsley has served as a director and a consultant to several public and private companies and has worked in a variety of industries including: consumer goods, energy, mining, oil & gas, nutraceuticals & pharmaceuticals, and technology. He is also a director of Evolving Gold Corp. (since March 15, 2015) and is the chief executive officer of Fortify Resources Inc. (since November 15, 2015), each a CSE listed company.

Brian Gusko, MBA

Mr. Gusko has significant international telecommunication business experience at the highest level. His international experience includes working in Corporate Planning with a Mitsubishi group company in Tokyo, Product Management at a Vodafone spin-off in the Netherlands, and being Managing Director of Palm’s South African wireless affiliate; he helped launched wireless data services in Africa for Palm’s new smart phones. He also was a research associate with the U.S. Department of Commerce at an embassy posting, researching telecom and technology companies. Mr. Gusko held management positions at Telus Advanced Communications, and Telus Planet Internet in Alberta Canada where his portfolio was responsible for the majority of TELUS web hosting and internet traffic, respectively. He is also currently on the Board of Directors of Lomiko Metals and Cloud Nine Education Group, Ltd. Previously he has served on the boards of Robix Alternative Fuels, Inc. (from February 2014 to February 2015), Vodis Pharmaceuticals Inc. (from July 2014 to September 2014) and Arco Resources (from June 2015 to May 2016) . Previously he has served as chief financial officer of the following Canadian public companies: UC Resources Ltd. (from August 2007 to August 2009), Vodis Pharmaceuticals Inc.

37

(from July 2014 to November 2015), and First Choice Products Inc. from September 2015 to November 2015).

Christine Mah

Ms. Mah is an experienced professional holding a marketing diploma from British Columbia Institute of Technology. Ms. Mah has spent 10 years working with reporting companies assisting with office management, office system implementation, book keeping and administration services. Her corporate experience has ranged from industries such as communications, technology, consumer goods, culinary. Ms. Mah has had experience relevant to audit committees by actively participating in the yearly audits of Evolving Gold Corp., a Canadian public company listed on the CSE.

Derick Sinclair, B.Comm., CA Chief Financial Officer - Mr. Sinclair, is an experienced CFO having worked with US and Canadian public and private companies for over 20 years. He is a contractor and devotes approximately 15% of his time to the Company. His duties with the Company include, bookkeeping, financial management and reporting, assisting the CEO where necessary and liaising between the board and the Company’s auditors. Mr. Sinclair began his accounting career in 1982 as an auditor with KPMG Peat Marwick Thorne. He received his CA designation in 1985 and his Bachelor of Commerce (Honours) University of Windsor in 1982. From 1985 to 2003, Mr. Sinclair was employed by BC Rail and its subsidiaries and their successors. He began at BC Rail as a Manager in General Accounting rising in 1998 to the role of CFO & VP Administration Westel Telecommunications Ltd. Mr. Sinclair currently operates DR Financial Services Limited focused on providing controller services to small and medium size public companies. He is also CFO of Cadan Resources Corporation, Madeir Minerals Ltd, and Viscount Mining Ltd publicly traded exploration companies on the TSX Venture Exchange.

Other Reporting Company Experience

The following table sets out the directors, officers and promoters of the Company that are, or have been within the last five years, directors, officers or promoters of other companies that are or were reporting companies in any Canadian jurisdiction:

B. Compensation.

Remuneration and Borrowing

The Board of Directors may determine remuneration to be paid to the directors. The Compensation Committee assists the Board of Directors in reviewing and approving the compensation structure for the directors. The Board of Directors may exercise all the powers of the Company to borrow money and to mortgage or charge its undertaking, property and uncalled capital, and to issue debentures or other securities whether outright or as security for any debt obligations of the Company or of any third party.

Compensation of Directors and Executive Officers

In 2015, we paid aggregate cash compensation of approximately $144,001 to our directors and executive officers as a group. We do not pay or set aside any amounts for pension, retirement or other benefits for our officers and directors.

We provide directors and officer’s liability and company reimbursement insurance to cover all of our directors and officers against losses arising from claims we indemnify for. Our current insurance coverage will expire on November 9, 2014. We plan to renew the insurance upon its expiration.

Stock Option Plan

The Board adopted a stock option plan (the “Option Plan”), which was approved by shareholders on May 20, 2016 at the Company’s Annual General Meeting. The purpose of the Option Plan is to provide incentives to attract, retain and motivate executive officers, directors and employees whose present and future contributions are important to the Company. The maximum number of the Company’s shares of common stock reserved for issuance pursuant to stock options granted under the Option Plan will, at any time, be 10% of the number of the Company’s shares of common stock then outstanding. The number of the Company’s shares of common stock that may be issued to any one person shall not exceed 5% of the

38

Company’s total issued and outstanding shares of common stock on a non-diluted basis. The price at which the Company’s shares may be issued under the stock option plan will be determined from time to time by the Board in compliance with the rules and policies of any stock exchange upon which the Company’s shares of common stock are listed. The vesting of options granted under the Option Plan will be determined by the Board at the time of the grant. Options granted under the Option Plan may be exercisable over a maximum period of five years. They will generally have a term of 5 years and vest over four years, 25% on each of the first four anniversaries of the date of grant, provided the optionee is in continuous service to the Company. The Board may amend the terms of the stock Option Plan from time to time, to the extent permitted by the Option Plan and any rules and policies of any stock exchange on which the Company’s shares of common stock are listed, or terminate it at any time. If the Company accepts any offer to amalgamate, merge or consolidate with any other company (other than a wholly-owned subsidiary) or if holders of greater than 50% of the Company’s shares of commons stock accept an offer made to all or substantially all of the holders of the Company’s shares of common stock to purchase in excess of 50% of our current issued and outstanding shares of commons stock, any then-unvested options will automatically vest in full.

As of March 1, 2011 Mr. Unwin voluntarily reduced his annual base salary to $120,000. This reduction will remain in place until January 31, 2013. On June 1, 2011, Mr. Unwin took a further annual base salary reduction to $100,000. As of February 1, 2012, Mr. Unwin’s salary has been returned to $160,000 per year.

As of March 1, 2011 Mr. Sinclair voluntarily reduced his base annual fee to $18,000. This reduction remained in place until January 31, 2013. Mr. Sinclair’s base annual fee was returned to $36,000 as of February 1, 2012.

Change in Control Agreements

As part of his Employment Agreement, the Company entered into a change of control agreement with Mr. Unwin effective as of January 1, 2010. This is the only change of control agreement the Company has entered into. In the event of a potential change in control and until 12 months after a change in control, unless Mr. Unwin terminates his employment with the Company for good reason, Mr. Unwin will continue to diligently carry out his duties and obligations under his employment agreement. If within 12 months following a change of control of the Company, Mr. Unwin terminates his employment for good reason, or the Company terminates his employment other than for cause, the Company is obligated to pay to Mr. Unwin a lump sum equal to 12 months of his then current base salary plus other sums owed for arrears of salary, vacation pay and any performance bonus. In such case, The Company is also obligated to maintain Mr. Unwin’s benefits for the 12-month period and his unvested stock options will immediately vest.

Corporate Governance

Composition of the Board

The Board facilitates its exercise of independent supervision over management by ensuring that the Board is composed of a majority of independent directors. Directors are considered to be independent if they have no direct or indirect material relationship with the Company. A “material relationship” is a relationship which could, in the view of the Board, be reasonably expected to interfere with the exercise of a director’s independent judgment. The Board has four directors, of which Mr. Gusko is considered to be independent for the purposes of NI 58-101.

The mandate of the Board is to act in the best interests of the Company and to supervise management. The Board is responsible for approving long-term strategic plans and annual operating budgets recommended by management. Board consideration and approval is also required for material contracts and business transactions, and all debt and equity financing transactions. Any responsibility which is not delegated to management or to the committees of the Board remains with the Board. The Board meets on a regular basis consistent with the state of the Company’s affairs and also from time to time as deemed necessary to enable it to fulfill its responsibilities.

The Chairman of the Board is Brian Gusko, who is an independent director.

Duties of Directors

Under British Columbia law, our directors have a duty of loyalty to act honestly in good faith with a view to our best interest. Our directors also have a duty to exercise the care, diligence and skills that a reasonably prudent person would exercise in comparable circumstances. In fulfilling their duty of care to us, our directors must ensure compliance with our amended and restated memorandum and articles of association. A shareholder has the right to seek damages if a duty owed by our directors is breached.

The functions and powers of our Board include, among others:

• convening shareholders’ annual general meetings and reporting its work to shareholders at such meetings;

• issuing authorized but unissued shares of common stock and redeeming or purchasing outstanding shares of common stock of our Company;

• declaring dividends and distributions;

• appointing officers and determining the term of office and compensation of officers;

• exercising the borrowing powers of our Company and mortgaging the property of our Company; and

• approving the transfer of shares of common stock of our company, including the registering of such shares of common stock in our share register.

Position Descriptions

The Board has not developed written position descriptions for the chair or the chair of any Board committees or for the CEO. Given the size of the Company and the existence of only a small number of officers, the Board does not feel that it is

40

necessary at this time to formalize position descriptions in order to delineate their respective responsibilities.

Nomination of Directors

The Company does not have a formal process or committee for proposing new nominees for election to the Board. The nominees are generally the result of recruitment efforts by the Board members, including both formal and informal discussions among Board members.

Qualification

There is no shareholding qualification for directors.

Orientation and Continuing Education

When new directors are appointed, they receive orientation, commensurate with their previous experience, on the Company’s technologies, business and industry and on the responsibilities of directors. New directors also receive historical public information about the Company and the mandates of the committees of the Board. Board meetings may also include presentations by the Company’s management and employees to give the directors additional insight into the Company’s business. In addition, new directors are encouraged to visit and meet with management on a regular basis and to pursue continuing education opportunities where appropriate.

Assessments

The Board regularly assesses its own effectiveness and the effectiveness and contribution of each Board committee member and director.

Interested Transactions

A director may vote with respect to any contract or transaction in which he or she is interested, provided that the nature of the interest of any director in such contract or transaction is disclosed by him or her at or prior to its consideration and any vote in that matter.

Board Committees

Our Board has established an Audit Committee and a Compensation Committee.

Audit Committee

The Audit Committee has various responsibilities as set forth in Multilateral Instrument 52-110 (“MI 52-110”). The Audit Committee oversees the accounting and financial reporting practices and procedures of the Company and the audits of the Company’s financial statements. The principal responsibilities of the Audit Committee include: (i) overseeing the quality, integrity and appropriateness of the internal controls and accounting procedures of the Company, including reviewing the Company’s procedures for internal control with the Company’s auditors and Chief Financial Officer; (ii) reviewing and assessing the quality and integrity of the Company’s internal and external reporting processes, its annual and quarterly financial statements and related management discussion and analysis, and all other material continuous disclosure documents; (iii) establishing separate reviews with management and external auditors of significant changes in procedures or financial and accounting practices, difficulties encountered during auditing, and significant judgments made in management's preparation of financial statements; (iv) monitoring compliance with legal and regulatory requirements related to financial reporting; (v) reviewing and pre-approving the engagement of the auditor of the Company and independent audit fees; and (vi) assessing the Company’s accounting policies, and considering, approving, and monitoring significant changes in accounting principles and practices recommended by management and the auditor.

Audit Committee Charter

The Audit Committee Charter is filed as an exhibit to this Form 20-F.

Composition of the Audit Committee

As noted above, the members of the Audit Committee during the 2015 fiscal year were Robert Horsley, Brian Gusko and Christine Mah, all of whom were considered independent pursuant to NI 52-110, except for Mr. Horsley. All members of the

41

Audit Committee are considered to be financially literate.

A member of the Audit Committee is independent if the member has no direct or indirect material relationship with the Company. A material relationship means a relationship which could, in the view of the Board, reasonably interfere with the exercise of a member’s independent judgment.

A member of the Audit Committee is considered financially literate if he or she has the ability to read and understand a set of financial statements that present a breadth and level of complexity of accounting issues that are generally comparable to the breadth and complexity of the issues that can reasonably be expected to be raised by the Company.

Relevant Education and Experience

Please see above for the biographies of. Robert Horsley, Brian Gusko and Christine Mah.

Pre-Approval Policies on Certain Exemptions

The Audit Committee has not adopted specific policies and procedures for the engagement of non-audit services. The Company’s auditors have not provided any material non-audit services.

Compensation Committee

Our Compensation Committee consisted of Robert Horsley, Brian Gusko and Christine Mah during the 2015 fiscal year. Mr. Brian Gusko is the chairman of our Compensation Committee. Our Board has determined that Brian Gusko and Christina Mah were “independent directors” within the meaning of NYSE Manual Section 303A.

Our Compensation Committee is responsible for, among other things:

• reviewing and approving corporate goals and objectives relevant to the compensation of our chief executive officer, evaluating the performance of our chief executive officer in light of those goals and objectives, and setting the compensation level of our chief executive officer based on this evaluation;

• reviewing and making recommendations to our Board regarding our compensation policies and forms of compensation provided to our directors and officers;

• reviewing and making recommendations to our chief executive officer regarding the compensation level, share- based compensation and bonuses for our officers other than our chief executive officer;

• reviewing and determining cash and share-based compensation for our director;

• administering our equity incentive plans in accordance with the terms thereof; and

• such other matters that are specifically delegated to the Compensation Committee by our Board from time to time.

D. Employees

As of December 31, 2015 the Company had the following number of employees and contractors:

The Company utilizes consultants and contractors to carry on many of its activities and, in particular, to supervise and conduct pre-clinical scientific experiments, assay development and validation. In addition, the Company’s Chief Financial Officer is a contractor not a full time employee. Other functions the Company has decided to outsource include assay development, formulation, clinical trials and manufacturing. It is currently more cost-effective to outsource these functions due to the Company’s sporadic requirements. As the Company expands its activities, it is probable that it will hire additional employees. In addition, contractors and employees may move between locations from time to time as conditions and business opportunities warrant.

E. Share Ownership.

As of December 31, 2015, the Company has 1,365,887 shares of common stock outstanding:

The following table sets forth, as of January 20, 2016: (a) the names of each beneficial owner of more than five percent (5%) of our Common Stock known to us, the number of shares of Common Stock beneficially owned by each such person, and the percent of our Common Stock so owned before and after the Share Exchange; and (b) the names of each director, executive

42

officer and significant employee, the number of shares our Common Stock beneficially owned, and the percentage of our Common Stock so owned, by each such person, and by all of our directors and executive officers as a group. Each person has sole voting and investment power with respect to the shares of our Common Stock, except as otherwise indicated. Beneficial ownership consists of a direct interest in the shares of Common Stock, except as otherwise indicated. Individual beneficial ownership also includes shares of Common Stock that a person has the right to acquire within 60 days from January 20, 2016.

During the year ended December 31, 2015, the Company assigned certain loans from related parties to Cabbay pursuant to the Arrangement.

During the year ended December 31, 2015, the Company entered into debt settlement agreements with officers and directors of the Company, through which an aggregate of $535,077 due to related parties was forgiven.

There are no amounts due to the Company from companies that have directors in common with the Company or have a partner who is a director of the Company.

C . Interests of Experts and Counsel.

Not applicable.

The quarterly high and low sales prices on the CSE for our shares of Common Stock for the two most recently completed full financial years prior to the original filing date of the 2015 Form 20-F are

The monthly high and low sales prices on the CSE for out ordinary shares for each month during the 2015 calendar year:

On April 4, 2016, the closing price of was $0.12 per share

The transfer of our shares of common stock is managed by our transfer agent, Computershare Trust Company of Canada.

B. Plan of Distribution

Not applicable.

C. Markets

The Company’s shares of Common Stock are currently traded on the CSE under the symbol “TO”, the Frankfort Stock Exchange under the symbol “1PSN” and are quoted on the OTC Pink Sheets under the symbol “TOWTF”.

D. Selling Shareholders

Not applicable.

45

E. Dilution

Not applicable.

F. Expense of the Issue

Not applicable.

• On January 6, 2014, the Company extended the expiry date 2,000 share purchase warrants exercisable to purchase one Common Share of the Company at an exercise price of $7.50 per share from the original expiry date of February 28, 2014 to August 28, 2014;

• On January 10, 2014, the Company granted 13,333 stock options to advisors and consultants of the Company to purchase Common Shares of the Company for proceeds of $0.10 per common share expiring January 10, 2017;

• On March 7, 2014 the Company issued 525,000 stock options to directors, officers, advisors and consultants of the Company to purchase common shares of the Company for proceeds of $3.00 per common share expiring March 7, 2019;

• On May 7, 2014 the Company announced that it had entered into an advisory agreement with TriPoint Global Equities LLC (“TriPoint”) and issued to TriPoint warrants to purchase 23,333 shares at a price of $3.00 per share.
  The warrants expire on February 28, 2016;

• On June 14, 2014 the Company issued 16,667 options to purchase Common Shares to a director and officer. The options may be exercised at a price of $1.80 per share for a period of one (1) year;

• On October 2, 2014 the Company closed the first tranche of a non-brokered private placement and issued 50,667 units for gross proceeds of $76,000 (including $6,000 in cash proceeds and $70,000 to settle outstanding accounts payable). 50,667 warrants were issued with an expiration date of October 3, 2015. Each unit is comprised of one Common Share and one share purchase warrant, each warrant being exercisable for one common share at an exercise price of $0.15;

• On October 28, 2014 the Company issued to consultants a total of 16,667 options to purchase common shares with an exercise price of $3.00, 6,667 of the options will expire on October 28, 2015; 3,333 of the options will expire on October 28, 2018; and 6,667 will expire October 28, 2020;

• On February 2, 2015, the Company issued a total of 13,333 options to purchase Common Shares to a director and a consultant;

• On March 20, 2015 the Company closed the second tranche of a non-brokered private placement and issued 66,666 units at $1.50 per unit for cash proceeds of $41,000 (of which $30,000 was received in 2014 and $11,000 received in 2015) and to retire debts totaling $59,000. Each unit is comprise of one common share and one share purchase warrant exercisable for one common share at an exercise price of $4.50 until March 20, 2016;

• On April 1, 2015, the Company received regulatory approval to re-price its warrants outstanding as at March 30, 2015 to an exercise price of $0.90 for a period of 30 days;

• On May 20, 2015, the Company received $3,600 for the exercise of 4,000 warrants to purchase a common share at $0.90. The shares were not issued until after December 31, 2015.

B. Memorandum and Articles of Association

We are organized under the laws of the Province of British Columbia, Canada and have been assigned the number BC1056802.

Our Articles do not contain a description of our objects and purposes.

Our Articles do not restrict a director’s power to vote on a proposal, arrangement or contract in which the director is materially interested, vote on compensation to themselves or any other members of their body in the absence of an independent quorum or exercise borrowing powers. There is no mandatory retirement age for our directors and our directors are not required to own securities of our company in order to serve as directors.

Our authorized capital consists of an unlimited number of Class A common shares without par value. The holders of Common Shares are entitled to vote at all meetings of the Company’s shareholders, to receive dividends, if, as and when declared by the Board, and, subject to the rights of holders of any shares ranking in priority to, or on parity with the Common Shares, to participate ratably in any distribution of property or assets upon the liquidation, winding-up, or other dissolution of the Company. The Common Shares are not subject to any future call or assessments and do not have any pre-emptive rights

47

or redemption rights.

There are no limitations specific to the rights of non-Canadians to hold or vote our common shares under the laws of Canada or British Columbia, or in our charter documents.

Our Articles provide for the election of directors at each annual general meeting. Each director holds office until the next annual general meeting of our shareholders or until his successor is elected or appointed, unless his office is earlier vacated in accordance with our Articles or with the provisions of the BCBCA.

An annual meeting of shareholders must be held at such time in each year that is not later than 15 months after the last preceding annual meeting and at such place as our Board may from time to time determine. The quorum for the transaction of business at any meeting of shareholders is two persons who are entitled to vote at the meeting in person or by proxy and who hold in aggregate at least 5% of the issued shares entitled to be voted at the meeting. Only persons entitled to vote, our directors and auditors and others who, although not entitled to vote, are otherwise entitled or required to be present, are entitled to be present at a meeting of shareholders.

Other than not specifically providing a mechanism for shareholders to call a special meeting, our do Articles contain any provisions that would have an effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a change in control of our Company. Our Articles also do not contain any provisions that would operate only with respect to a merger, acquisition or corporate restructuring of our Company.

Our Articles do not contain any provisions governing the ownership threshold above which shareholder ownership must be disclosed.

Our Articles are not significantly different from the requirements of the BCBCA and the conditions imposed by our Articles governing changes in capital are not more stringent than what is required by the BCBCA.

C. Material Contracts

Except as otherwise disclosed in this Form 20-F, the Company has no other material contracts.

D. Exchange Controls

There are no laws, decrees or regulations in Canada relating to restrictions on the export or import of capital, or affecting the remittance of interest, dividends or other payments to non-resident holders of our shares of common stock.

E. Taxation

Canada

Canadian Federal Income Tax Information for United States Residents

The following is a discussion of material Canadian federal income tax considerations generally applicable to holders of our common shares who, for purposes of the Income Tax Act (Canada) and the regulations thereunder, or the Canadian Tax Act:

• deal at arm’s length and are not affiliated with us;

• hold such shares as capital property;

• do not use or hold (and will not use or hold) and are not deemed to use or hold our common shares, in or in the course of carrying on business in Canada;

• have not been at any time residents of Canada; and

• are, at all relevant times, residents of the United States, or U.S. Residents, under the Canada-United States Income Tax Convention (1980), or the Convention.

TAX MATTERS ARE VERY COMPLICATED AND THE CANADIAN FEDERAL INCOME TAX CONSEQUENCES OF PURCHASING, OWNING AND DISPOSING OF OUR COMMON SHARES WILL DEPEND UPON THE STOCKHOLDER’S PARTICULAR SITUATION. THE SUMMARY OF MATERIAL CANADIAN FEDERAL INCOME TAX CONSEQUENCES SET FORTH BELOW IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE ONLY A GENERAL SUMMARY AND IS NOT INTENDED TO BE A COMPLETE ANALYSIS OR DESCRIPTION OF ALL POTENTIAL CANADIAN FEDERAL INCOME TAX CONSEQUENCES.

48

THIS DISCUSSION DOES NOT INCLUDE A DESCRIPTION OF THE TAX LAWS OF ANY PROVINCE OR TERRITORY WITHIN CANADA. ACCORDINGLY, HOLDERS AND PROSPECTIVE HOLDERS OF OUR COMMON SHARES ARE ENCOURAGED TO CONSULT WITH THEIR OWN TAX ADVISERS ABOUT THE TAX CONSEQUENCES TO THEM HAVING REGARD TO THEIR OWN PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCES, INCLUDING ANY CONSEQUENCES OF PURCHASING, OWNING OR DISPOSING OF OUR COMMON SHARES ARISING UNDER CANADIAN FEDERAL, CANADIAN PROVINCIAL OR TERRITORIAL, U.S. FEDERAL, U.S. STATE OR LOCAL TAX LAWS OR TAX LAWS OF JURISDICTIONS OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES OR CANADA.

This summary is based on the current provisions of the Canadian Income Tax Act, proposed amendments to the Canadian Income Tax Act publicly announced by the Minister of Finance (Canada) prior to the date hereof (the “Proposed Amendments”), and the provisions of the Convention as in effect on the date hereof. No assurance can be given that the Proposed Amendments will be entered into law in the manner proposed, or at all. No advance income tax ruling has been requested or obtained from the Canada Revenue Agency to confirm the tax consequences of any of the transactions described herein.

This summary is not exhaustive of all possible Canadian federal income tax consequences for U.S. Residents, and other than the Proposed Amendments, does not take into account or anticipate any changes in law, whether by legislative, administrative, governmental or judicial decision or action, nor does it take into account Canadian provincial, U.S. or foreign tax considerations which may differ significantly from those discussed herein. No assurances can be given that subsequent changes in law or administrative policy will not affect or modify the opinions expressed herein.

A U.S. Resident will not be subject to tax under the Canadian Tax Act in respect of any capital gain on a disposition of our common shares unless such shares constitute “taxable Canadian property”, as defined in the Canadian Tax Act, of the U.S. Resident and the U.S. Resident is not eligible for relief pursuant to the Convention. Our common shares will not constitute “taxable Canadian property” if, at any time during the 60-month period immediately preceding the disposition of the common shares, the U.S. Resident, persons with whom the U.S. Resident did not deal at arm’s length, or the U.S. Resident together with all such persons, did not own 25% or more of the issued shares of any class or series of shares of our capital stock. In addition, the Convention generally will exempt a U.S. Resident who would otherwise be liable to pay Canadian income tax in respect of any capital gain realized by the U.S. Resident on the disposition of our common shares, from such liability provided that the value of our common shares is not derived principally from real property situated in Canada, Canadian Resource Property and Canadian Timber Resource Property. However, where the US resident and purchaser are related the purchaser must generally report the transaction to the Canada Revenue Agency within 30 days of the transaction date to benefit from the Convention. The Convention may not be available to a U.S. Resident that is a U.S. LLC which is not subject to tax in the U.S.

Amounts in respect of our common shares paid or credited or deemed to be paid or credited as, on account or in lieu of payment of, or in satisfaction of, dividends to a U.S. Resident will generally be subject to Canadian non-resident withholding tax at the rate of 25%. Currently, under the Convention the rate of Canadian non-resident withholding tax will generally be reduced to:

• 5% of the gross amount of dividends if the beneficial owner is a company that is resident in the U.S. and that owns at least 10% of our voting shares; or

• 15% of the gross amount of dividends if the beneficial owner is some other resident of the U.S.

Generally, the Convention does not apply to US resident LLC’s that are fiscally transparent. However, the Convention may apply to afford reduced withholding tax rates on dividends attributed to a US resident member of a US resident fiscally transparent LLC to the extent of the dividend being consider to have been received by that member.

United States Federal Income Tax Information for United States Holders.

The following is a general discussion of material U.S. federal income tax consequences of the ownership and disposition of our common shares by U.S. Holders (as defined below). This discussion is based on the United States Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, Treasury regulations promulgated thereunder, and judicial and administrative interpretations thereof, all as in effect at the date hereof and all of which are subject to change, possibly with retroactive effect. This discussion only addresses the tax consequences for U.S. Holders that will hold their common shares as a “capital asset” and does not address U.S. federal income tax consequences that may be relevant to particular U.S. Holders in light of their individual circumstances or U.S. Holders that are subject to special treatment under certain U.S. federal income tax laws, such as:

• tax-exempt organizations and pension plans;

49

• persons subject to alternative minimum tax;

• banks and other financial institutions;

• insurance companies;

• partnerships and other pass-through entities (as determined for United States federal income tax purposes);

• broker-dealers;

• persons who hold their common shares as a hedge or as part of a straddle, constructive sale, conversion transaction, and other risk management transaction; and

• persons who acquired their common shares through the exercise of employee stock options or otherwise as compensation.

As used herein, the term “U.S. Holder” means a beneficial owner of our common shares that is:

• an individual citizen or resident of the United States;

• a corporation, a partnership or entity treated as a corporation or partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes, that is created or organized in or under the laws of the United States or any political subdivision thereof;

• an estate the income of which is subject to U.S. federal income taxation regardless of its source; and

• a trust if both: a United States court is able to exercise primary supervision over the administration of the trust; and one or more United States persons have the authority to control all substantial decisions of the trust.

TAX MATTERS ARE VERY COMPLICATED AND THE UNITED STATES FEDERAL INCOME TAX CONSEQUENCES OF PURCHASING, OWNING AND DISPOSING OF OUR COMMON SHARES WILL DEPEND UPON THE STOCKHOLDER’S PARTICULAR SITUATION. THE SUMMARY OF MATERIAL UNITED STATES FEDERAL INCOME TAX CONSEQUENCES SET FORTH BELOW IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE ONLY A GENERAL SUMMARY AND IS NOT INTENDED TO BE A COMPLETE ANALYSIS OR DESCRIPTION OF ALL POTENTIAL UNITED STATES FEDERAL INCOME TAX CONSEQUENCES.

NOTE THAT THIS DISCUSSION DOES NOT INCLUDE A DESCRIPTION OF THE TAX LAWS OF ANY STATE OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT WITHIN THE UNITED STATES. ACCORDINGLY, HOLDERS AND PROSPECTIVE HOLDERS OF OUR COMMON SHARES ARE ENCOURAGED TO CONSULT THEIR TAX ADVISORS ABOUT THE U.S. FEDERAL, STATE, LOCAL, AND FOREIGN TAX CONSEQUENCES OF PURCHASING, OWNING AND DISPOSING OF OUR COMMON SHARES.

Ownership of Shares

The gross amount of any distribution received by a U.S. Holder with respect to our common shares generally will be included in the U.S. Holder’s gross income as a dividend to the extent attributable to our current and accumulated earnings and profits (as determined under U.S. federal income tax principles). To the extent a distribution received by a U.S. Holder is not a dividend because it exceeds the U.S. Holder’s pro rata share of our current and accumulated earnings and profits, it will be treated first as a tax-free return of capital and reduce (but not below zero) the adjusted tax basis of the U.S. Holder’s shares. To the extent the distribution exceeds the adjusted tax basis of the U.S. Holder’s shares, the remainder will be taxed as capital gain (the taxation of capital gain is discussed under the heading “Sale of Shares” below).

For taxable years beginning before January 1, 2009, dividends received by non-corporate U.S. Holders from a qualified foreign corporation are taxed at the same preferential rates that apply to long-term capital gains. A foreign corporation is a “qualified foreign corporation” if it is eligible for the benefits of a comprehensive income tax treaty with the United States (the income tax treaty between Canada and the United States is such a treaty) or the shares with respect to which such dividend is paid is readily tradable on an established securities market in the United States (such as the Nasdaq Capital Market). Notwithstanding satisfaction of one or both of these conditions, a foreign corporation is not a qualified foreign corporation if it is a passive foreign investment company (“PFIC”) for the taxable year of the corporation in which the dividend is paid or the preceding taxable year. (Whether a foreign corporation is a PFIC is discussed below under the heading “Passive Foreign Investment Companies”). A foreign corporation that is a PFIC for any taxable year within a U.S. person’s holding period generally is treated as a PFIC for all subsequent years in the U.S. person’s holding period. Although we have not been, are not now, and do not expect to be a PFIC, and we don’t expect to pay dividends, you should be aware of the following matters in the event that we do become a PFIC and do pay dividends.

If we were to become a PFIC, then U.S. Holders who acquire our common shares may be treated as holding shares of a PFIC throughout their holding period for the purpose of determining whether dividends received from us are dividends from a qualified foreign corporation. As a consequence, dividends received by U.S. Holders may not be eligible for taxation at the preferential rates applicable to long-term capital gains.

50

If a distribution is paid in Canadian dollars, the U.S. dollar value of such distribution on the date of receipt is used to determine the amount of the distribution received by a U.S. Holder. A U.S. Holder who continues to hold such Canadian dollars after the date on which they are received, may recognize gain or loss upon their disposition due to exchange rate fluctuations. Generally such gains and losses will be ordinary income or loss from U.S. sources.

U.S. Holders may deduct Canadian tax withheld from distributions they receive for the purpose of computing their U.S. federal taxable income (or alternatively a credit may be claimed against the U.S. Holder’s U.S. federal income tax liability as discussed below under the heading “Foreign Tax Credit”). Corporate U.S. Holders generally will not be allowed a dividend received deduction with respect to dividends they receive from us.

Foreign Tax Credit

Generally, the dividend portion of a distribution received by a U.S. Holder will be treated as income in the passive income category for foreign tax credit purposes. Subject to a number of limitations, a U.S. Holder may elect to claim a credit against its U.S. federal income tax liability (in lieu of a deduction) for Canadian withholding tax deducted from its distributions. The credit may be claimed only against U.S. federal income tax attributable to a U.S. Holder’s passive income that is from foreign sources.

If we were to become a qualified foreign corporation with respect to a non-corporate U.S. Holder, dividends received by such U.S. Holder will qualify for taxation at the same preferential rates that apply to long-term capital gains. In such case, the dividend amount that would otherwise be from foreign sources is reduced by multiplying the dividend amount by a fraction, the numerator of which is the U.S. Holder’s preferential capital gains tax rate and the denominator of which is the U.S. Holder’s ordinary income tax rate. The effect is to reduce the dividend amount from foreign sources, thereby reducing the U.S. federal income tax attributable to foreign source income against which the credit may be claimed. Canadian withholding taxes that cannot be claimed as a credit in the year paid may be carried back to the preceding year and then forward 10 years and claimed as a credit in those years, subject to the same limitations referred to above.

The rules relating to the determination of the foreign tax credit are very complex. U.S. Holders and prospective U.S. Holders should consult their own tax advisors to determine whether and to what extent they would be entitled to claim a foreign tax credit.

Sale of Shares

Subject to the discussion of the “passive foreign investment company” rules below, a U.S. Holder generally will recognize capital gain or loss upon the sale of our shares equal to the difference between: (a) the amount of cash plus the fair market value of any property received; and (b) the U.S. Holder’s adjusted tax basis in such shares. This gain or loss generally will be capital gain or loss from U.S. sources, and will be long-term capital gain or loss if the U.S. Holder held its shares for more than 12 months. Generally, the net long-term capital gain of a non-corporate U.S. Holder from the sale of shares is subject to taxation at a top marginal rate of 15%. A Capital gain that is not long-term capital gain is taxed at ordinary income rates. The deductibility of capital losses is subject to certain limitations.

Passive Foreign Investment Companies

We will be a PFIC if, in any taxable year either: (a) 75% or more of our gross income consists of passive income; or (b) 50% or more of the value of our assets is attributable to assets that produce, or are held for the production of, passive income. Subject to certain limited exceptions, if we meet the gross income test or the asset test for a particular taxable year, our shares held by a U.S. Holder in that year will be treated as shares of a PFIC for that year and all subsequent years in the U.S. Holder’s holding period, even if we fail to meet either test in a subsequent year.

If we were a PFIC in the future, gain realized by a U.S. Holder from the sale of PFIC Shares and certain dividends received on such shares would be subject to tax under the excess distribution regime, unless the U.S. Holder made one of the elections discussed below. Under the excess distribution regime, federal income tax on a U.S. Holder’s gain from the sale of PFIC Shares would be calculated by allocating the gain ratably to each day the U.S. Holder held its shares. Gain allocated to years preceding the first year in which we were a PFIC in the U.S. Holder’s holding period, if any, and gain allocated to the year of disposition would be treated as gain arising in the year of disposition and taxed as ordinary income. Gain allocated to all other years would be taxed at the highest tax rate in effect for each of those years. Interest for the late payment of tax would be calculated and added to the tax due for each of the PFIC Years, as if the tax was due and payable with the tax return filed for that year. A distribution that exceeds 125% of the average distributions received on PFIC Shares by a U.S. Holder during the 3 preceding taxable years (or, if shorter, the portion of the U.S. Holder’s holding period before the taxable year) would be taxed in a similar manner.

51

A U.S. Holder may avoid taxation under the excess distribution regime by making a qualified electing fund (“QEF”) election. For each year that we would meet the PFIC gross income test or asset test, an electing U.S. Holder would be required to include in gross income, its pro rata share of our net ordinary income and net capital gains, if any. The U.S. Holder’s adjusted tax basis in our shares would be increased by the amount of such income inclusions. An actual distribution to the U.S. Holder out of such income generally would not be treated as a dividend and would decrease the U.S. Holder’s adjusted tax basis in our shares. Gain realized from the sale of our shares covered by a QEF election would be taxed as a capital gain. U.S. Holders will be eligible to make QEF elections, only if we agree to provide to the U.S. Holders, which we do, the information they will need to comply with the QEF rules. Generally, a QEF election should be made by the due date of the U.S. Holder’s tax return for the first taxable year in which the U.S. Holder held our shares that includes the close of our taxable year for which we met the PFIC gross income test or asset test. A QEF election is made on IRS Form 8621.

A U.S. Holder may also avoid taxation under the excess distribution regime by timely making a mark-to-market election. An electing U.S. Holder would include in gross income the increase in the value of its PFIC Shares during each of its taxable years and deduct from gross income the decrease in the value of its PFIC Shares during each of its taxable years. Amounts included in gross income or deducted from gross income by an electing U.S. Holder are treated as ordinary income and ordinary deductions from U.S. sources. Deductions for any year are limited to the amount by which the income inclusions of prior years’ exceed the income deductions of prior years. Gain from the sale of PFIC Shares covered by an election is treated as ordinary income from U.S. sources while a loss is treated as an ordinary deduction from U.S. sources only to the extent of prior income inclusions. Losses in excess of such prior income inclusions are treated as capital losses from U.S. sources. A mark-to-market election is timely if it is made by the due date of the U.S. Holder’s tax return for the first taxable year in which the U.S. Holder held our shares that includes the close of our taxable year for which we met the PFIC gross income test or asset test. A mark-to-market election is also made on IRS Form 8621.

As noted above, a PFIC is not a qualified foreign corporation and hence dividends received from a PFIC are not eligible for taxation at preferential long-term capital gain tax rates. Similarly, ordinary income included in the gross income of a U.S. Holder who has made a QEF election or a market-to-market election, and dividends received from corporations subject to such election, are not eligible for taxation at preferential long-term capital gain rates. The PFIC rules are extremely complex and could, if they apply, have significant, adverse effects on the taxation of dividends received and gains realized by a U.S. Holder. Accordingly, prospective U.S. Holders are strongly urged to consult their tax adviser concerning the potential application of these rules to their particular circumstances.

Controlled Foreign Corporation

Special rules apply to certain U.S. Holders that own stock in a foreign corporation that is classified as a “controlled foreign corporation” (“CFC”). We do not expect to be classified as a CFC. However, future ownership changes could cause us to become a CFC. Prospective U.S. Holders are urged to consult their tax advisor concerning the potential application of the CFC rules to their particular circumstances.

Information Reporting and Backup Withholding

United States information reporting and backup withholding requirements may apply with respect to distributions to U.S. Holders, or the payment of proceeds from the sale of shares, unless the U.S. Holder: (a) is an exempt recipient (including a corporation); (b) complies with certain requirements, including applicable certification requirements; or (c) is described in certain other categories of persons. The backup withholding tax rate is currently 28%. Any amounts withheld from a payment to a U.S. Holder under the backup withholding rules may be credited against any U.S. federal income tax liability of the U.S. Holder and may entitle the U.S. Holder to a refund.

F. Dividends and Paying Agents

Not applicable.

G. Statements by Experts

Not applicable.

H. Documents on Display

Not applicable.

52

I. Subsidiary Information

None.

financial reporting is designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Internal control over financial reporting includes maintaining records that in reasonable detail accurately and fairly reflect our transactions; providing reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary for preparation of our financial statements; providing reasonable assurance that receipts and expenditures are made in accordance with management authorization; and providing reasonable assurance that unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of Company assets that could have a material effect on our financial statements would be prevented or detected on a timely basis. Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements and can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to financial statement preparation and presentation. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with policies or procedures may deteriorate. Management assessed the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2015. In making this assessment management used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission in Internal Control – Integrated Framework . Based on our assessment and the criteria discussed above, management believes that, as of December 31, 2015, the Company maintained effective internal control over financial reporting.

Although our Audit Committee currently does not have a formal policy in place to pre-approve all audit and non-audit services provided by our independent auditor and the fees for such non-audit services, the Company's audit committee has adopted a policy to review on an annual basis the performance, objectivity and independence of our independent auditor.

due to Leed Advisors Inc.’s resignation (due to audit scope limitations or otherwise), or for any other reason, the issue had not been resolved to Leed Advisors Inc.’s satisfaction prior to its resignation.

Appointment of James Stafford, Inc.

Our board of directors appointed James Stafford. to be our principal accountant effective February 3, 2014.

We did not consult James Stafford. regarding (i) the application of accounting principles to a specified transaction, either completed or proposed, or the type of audit opinion that might be rendered on our financial statements, or (ii) any matter that was either the subject of a disagreement or a reportable event as described in Item 16F(a)(1)(v) of Form 20-F.

Fiscal Year 2015

Resignation of James Stafford

Upon mutual agreement, James Stafford, resigned as our principal accountant effective April 16, 2015 and we appointed Davidson & Company LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for the year ended December 31, 2014.

Our Audit Committee and Board considered and approved the decision to change accountants. The audit report of James Stafford on our financial statements for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013 prepared in accordance with IFRS did not contain an adverse opinion, a disclaimer of opinion, a modification or a qualification.

During our most recent fiscal year and any subsequent interim period preceding such resignation, there were no disagreements with James Stafford on any matter of accounting principles or practices, financial statement disclosure, or auditing scope or procedure, which disagreements, if not resolved to the satisfaction of James Stafford, would have caused it to make reference to the subject matter of the disagreements in connection with its report. None of the following events occurred within our two most recent fiscal years and any subsequent interim period preceding James Stafford’s resignation:

due to James Stafford’s resignation (due to audit scope limitations or otherwise), or for any other reason, James Stafford did not so expand the scope of its audit or conduct such further investigation; or

56

due to James Stafford’s resignation (due to audit scope limitations or otherwise), or for any other reason, the issue had not been resolved to James Stafford’s satisfaction prior to its resignation.

Appointment of Davidson & Company LLP

Our board of directors appointed Davidson & Company LLP to be our principal accountant effective April 16, 2015.

We did not consult Davidson & Company LLP regarding (i) the application of accounting principles to a specified transaction, either completed or proposed, or the type of audit opinion that might be rendered on our financial statements, or (ii) any matter that was either the subject of a disagreement or a reportable event as described in Item 16F(a)(1)(v) of Form 20-F.