Good morning everybody. I'm glad that you can join us on this call.

I'll be taking us through the PowerPoint deck or the prezo today, and I'm ably joined by my colleagues: Marc Devine, CFO, and Simon Morrison, Managing Director and head of our IMT business, International Mass Torts business. In the room with us today we also have John George, who is the head of investor relations.

We have determined who will speak to what pages of the presentation, and I mention that because I'm assuming that you have copies or have had access to that prezo, as well as the results and the ASX announcement that was uploaded this morning prior to the market opening. Just by way of introduction, having been on these calls before, I wanted to just let people who are new to these investor calls know that in my role as Group CEO, I previously held the role as chief of staff to the Managing Director, Simon.

I have held both combined roles for the past 3 years. I'll be taking us through, guiding the discussion.

We do have questions that can be emailed to us, and we will then respond to those at the end of the presentation. Let's start on slide number 5, and that is getting right to the core of how we've done in FY 2026 half year, and here are the highlights.

First thing is that we have returned to profitability as compared to same period last year. We have an NPAT 6.7 million compared to a loss at the same time last year of $1.7 million in FY 2025, and that's been as a result of focus, hard work, and underlying business performance.

That is the first highlight. The next one is PI and our momentum in our traditional, whole-of-life activities.

Our core business, as is personal injury. We have two segments, cash-generating units segments, that is personal injury and class actions.

Over the years, they have been called various different things, and we'll sort of refer to that as we go through and do comparisons in the slideshow in greater detail for PI and class actions. On the PI front, we delivered real revenue growth and improved productivity half year on half year, and we'll go into that later.

Class actions is our other segment, and we have four in-principle settlement agreements reached for the half, and we are looking for that cash to flow in the second half. We felt it may have in this half; it hasn't, it's a timing issue.

We're pleased with where class actions is sitting at the moment. We will declare a 1.5 cents fully franked interim dividend, fully franked, I repeat, and that will be declared and payable on the 24th of April this year.

I'd like to make mention, as many many companies are doing, of their role and roll out of technology and technology execution. We have informed the market last year that we've established a Emerging Technology Centre, in that there is an AI core, and we are continuing to work through that.

We will have more to say about that at the end of this financial year as we move from very active work in proof of concept to outcomes that will look at our year ahead. As we always do in these presentations and our releases, we'd like to point out that our core role is to be there for our clients and to shine a light on injustice.

That is why we exist in the sense of operating a profitable business with returns to shareholders, absolutely essential, but we exist, and we do that via this clear focus on our clients. More than $600 million in the first half in damages was achieved for over 2,000 clients, and that includes our personal injury clients and class actions, the action is included in that, not the number of class members.

As we said, we're waiting for in-principle settlement agreements for those four class actions. Moving on to the next slide that's going to give us more depth.

I'm going to hand over to Marc Devine, our CFO.

Good morning everybody, and thanks for joining us. I'm just going to touch on the financial sort of highlights for the half.

This is on slide 6. Just reading across the top of the page first, the revenue of $108.8 million, up 8% on the prior corresponding period number of $100.7 [million?]

, which is a good outcome for the half. EBITDA was up quite substantially, it was up from $9.2 million in the previous half, it was a 77% increase to $21.1 million in the half year.

NPAT, as Carolyn alluded to earlier, $6.7 million in profit as opposed to the small loss the previous year. GOCF, the cash, which we'll talk about as we go through the slides, that was actually -$6.3 million in the half year, and there's some underlying sort of timing movements that we'll come to further on the cash flow.

EPS has improved from a -1.01 cents to 4.55 cents per share in the half year, which is a good outcome. As Carolyn said, the dividend has been declared and will be payable in April.

Just on revenue growth, it's sort of the last two reporting periods has seen growth in revenue, but it's climbed 8% in the half, mainly driven by sort of momentum in the productivity of the legal team. Even though there were less head count, there was actually a higher sort of legal output per fee earner, which was a good outcome for the half.

Class action revenue is pretty stable. Again, we'll talk a lot more at class actions as we go through the slide deck, and how the activities there will have an impact on revenue in a positive way in the future.

On the revenue side, recoverability has improved in the half year, I think last year was a poor year for recoverability, but in this half, we've managed to increase recoverability across most of our regions, which is again a good outcome and assists greatly in the EBITDA growth. As I mentioned, the enhanced fee earner productivity, which we're hoping to continue in the second half.

On the cash flow side, the biggest drag on the cash flow was a number of class action settlements which were earmarked to come in the first half. Very late in the piece, were actually pushed into the second half.

That's $17.6 million worth, which is quite a substantial amount. There's a couple of reasons, but there was the court action which was the judge had the orders late in December, deferred those to the new year, and we're still waiting on those receipts to come in.

The risk around not getting that cash is very minimal, it's more just the timing of it, and we think it will happen sort of by mid-March. Also, in the personal injury segment, there was delays in just processing settlement clearances through a government agency, so that's sort of impacted towards the end of the calendar year as well.

That timing of those releases actually reduced as we sit here today, so that blockage has eased up. I guess, yeah, just the general statement is that our focus obviously is on cash collection, making sure we try and get these class action receipts in as soon as possible, and we're working with the courts and our barristers, etc., to try and make that happen.

The last box on the right-hand side just around capital returns, the group's still focused on shareholder value, hence the interim dividend being declared. Obviously, we still do have an on-market buyback in place.

We haven't actually done a lot in that space in the last sort of 6 to 9 months, but yeah, when capital management allows, we'll definitely be acting that buyback program. Just to move over to slide 8, just more detail.

Some of this I'll skim over because I've already touched on, but as I said, revenue grew by 8%, EBITDA improved substantially from last year. I think it's a 19% margin this year as opposed to 11% last year.

Pleasingly, employee expenses were pretty stable, 1.5% increase. There were obviously increase in wages and other cost pressures that applied to employee expenses, but as I said, I think the fact that we didn't have as many head count as the last comparative period pretty much offset any of those increases in salaries, other costs.

Overheads, again, it's a pretty stable overhead business, not much movement in overheads, and good to see that that's flat with the revenue increasing. Moving to slide 9, just on the cash flows.

Probably the only main item here to call out is obviously the receipts from customers is impacted by the class action delay in the receipts. Otherwise, most of the other lines on a comparative basis are flat when you look at H1 2026 versus H1 2025.

There are some other disbursement moneys to be recovered as well and come in the second half that we expect in the first. Other things, payments to suppliers, pretty standard.

Income tax flattened out a bit. I think last year we had a lump sum tax payment due because we obviously had a tax payable position, whereas this current year we're paying installments, so that's sort of a more even trend throughout the year.

Obviously, just the statement at the bottom there that liquidity remains a focus and getting those receipts in is a priority of the business. Move to slide 10.

We just thought it worthwhile just to show the impact of the timing of those class actions if they were to have been received by 31st of December, and what that would have looked like from a GOCF perspective. We've just put in this bridge here, which has the four different actions that we're talking about.

Obviously, there's one material one there at the end, the $9.1 million. If all those receipts were received, it would have been a healthy GOCF of $11.3 million.

Again, it's not about if those receipts come in, it's just around the timing. We've already received, I think, $8.5 [million?]

of those in January and February, and the balance we expect in March. We just wanted to provide that sort of normalized view of the GOCF for the half.

Slide 10, the balance sheet. Again, it's a fairly stable balance sheet.

Probably the only things to call out, obviously, that with the delay in the receipts, we have had to use an overdraft facility during the period, the cash and bank balance there has moved from $18.1 [million?] at June to $1.1 [million?]

in December. There's still headroom, plenty of headroom in our facilities as at 31st of December, there's no sort of issues there.

Receivables have increased, I guess that reflective of that class action delayed receipts, the majority of the reason for that receivables increase. WIP's increased by a little bit.

The constraint also went up by 9.8% in the year as WIP has increased also. Otherwise, I think from a balance sheet perspective, it's fairly stable, with no sort of material movements outside the cash.

Thanks, Marc. That was, just to clarify, on slide 11 for those who were reading along.

I'll now speak about personal injury as a segment and the overview within those figures that we just heard from Marc. Just wanted to remind people who have been with us a long time will know this, but for new people on the call and new interested parties, investors, etc.

As a professional services firm, and the type of law that we do, it is very much defined by what we call velocity, and that is how long a case extends over as we receive, we open the file, we work it through, and we either settle or get a judgment in court to what we believe the benefit, of course, of the client in the vast majority of situations. Velocity measures how long that process takes.

In PI, which we're turning to now on slide 13, it means that our sort of cash and receipts can extend over more than one and or two reporting periods. As the matters have progressed and the revenue is proportionally recognized as it falls within the period, that's a known known, but the cash can be lumpy, and that's just something that's a bit different to the type of law that we operate in, and I thought I'd just say it again.

It can create period-to-period cash ups and downs, volatility, whatever word we like to use, despite what we're doing on the ground. I don't think that can be emphasized too much because it is a difference in how we run our show.

Personal injury. The sort of overview here is that we remain a leader in the Australian personal injury business, have for years.

Two other major competitors, between the three of us, there's roughly 30% of the personal injury market. The other 70% is made up of small boutique 2nd tier firms, small boutique firms, regional firms, and suburban firms.

We have 43 at the moment law offices. This is varying as we look at our property strategy and decide that we'll exit some geographic areas, enter into others, and the way in which we do that is varying in terms of our collaborations, etc., etc.

At this stage, 43 PI offices. We have 540 so 540 PI staff, and as I said, just under that 10% of the market share.

Scale and reach, well, that is about our national footprint, it is about our office structure, it is about our collaborations, and it is about our reach into suburban, high-growth suburban areas, and also regional areas. That then wraps up to an overall performance that you can see this year, or this half-on-half, is better than last.

Client success, we talked about that, but again, over 2,000 cases resolved. This is for PI in the first half, securing $376 million in damages.

Productivity gains, one of those words thrown around a lot, but basically, we talked to the market that full and last half, and full before that, about our CRM integration: Salesforce and the subsequent extension, Salesforce's Agentforce, to help take us into a more AI-enabled world at the front end. That work is very near completion, but the full integration has occurred, and this is assisting wait times, conversion rates, us being able to triage the clients and the work types, and assign work types.

It has become a far more productive and efficient operation. Always good, but we've got us working toward responding in shorter time, and in many cases, real time after that, straight to the lawyer, straight to the branch, etc.

The technology investment has been made some years ago in Salesforce. It is now enhanced.

The technology investment we're making now is in cloud-based activities, agent creation, connectors, getting agents to talk to agents, and what our AI interface is going to be with how we look at how we use AI in chronologies and I guess reporting, and reviewing, and looking at documents. We're still working through that as many many many firms are, but we believe that we're on top of it.

We'll be able to report more to you at the full. Moving on to the next slide, 14, this is showing the underlying, if I can use that word, performance of personal injury as a segment.

Now, it shows both net revenue and EBITDA. What we've done, you can see the box, the broken-line box on the top of some of those bar charts.

We've taken the data obviously from the historical published financial reports. However, what we wanted to show is because we've changed our cash-generating units to be named and the segments class actions only and PI only, we did have a number of other businesses in what was called NPA, national practice areas.

That included some law types that we've exited now 18 months ago, that included class actions within that new practice areas nomenclature. It included the brands that we acquired in, say, Western Australia, and also Shacks, which we now have for a long time in Queensland, and some other associated areas of business.

That's now all been cleaned out. We've got these two segments, and I don't believe the word underlying, but this is the pure comparison-to-comparison.

You can see here how personal injury has increased in terms of net revenue from H1 FY 2022 to H1 FY 2026. In terms of EBITDA, you can see what the graphs are showing you there.

We continue to be aware that we have a fragmented market in that there's that 70% of firms out there which present a great opportunity to work with, to acquire file acquisitions, to know that there is growth within that 70%. To that end, we told the market at full last year that we would be looking at file acquisition as a strategy, and we continue to do that, and just wanted to report that so far 168 quality files have been acquired in this first half, and we are pursuing a number of opportunities as a sort of strategic thrust.

Onto class action overview. Again, we've tried to color the bar charts to explain the additional information that is not in Slide 17.

Oh, I've just been reminded by our fearless CFO that I should have said we are up to now slide 17. Thank you, Marc.

I going straight to the historical context there, His father told me to say thank you. That is the bar charts there show the information as shown in the financial reports, but with the movement of the segments, etc., etc.

Again, use the word underlying, but what the movement is. We can see the revenue is sort of holding steady over the years, and we look at that EBITDA for class actions, and Mark has talked to that, and we will continue to give you more information about that.

We've mentioned last year that we have our robust pipeline. We do, in investigations and in actual active matters, filed actions, that continues: 27 under investigation, 27 filed actions.

We also introduced last year the notion of the IMT business, International Mass Torts business, that is run from our US hub, which Simon Morrison, our Managing Director, runs and heads. That's why Simon is going to talk to that in this presentation alone, because this is the area that's new to Shine and very exciting.

We are getting referrals, Shine Justice, from the hub through the class actions pipeline as the strategy has determined, so that's exciting. The H1 impact, timing impact, as Marc has talked about in terms of cash, is something that we are watching carefully, but well we know we're managing as we can.

Four actions that we have achieved in-principle settlement agreements with, in H1 total $232 million in gross client quantum. Let's move to just a reminder on page 18 of our class actions portfolio composition.

It has not changed in terms of strategic positioning. In other words, we're a broad church.

We have a number of actions in a number of matter-type areas within class actions: financial services, First Nations, shareholder, consumers, and employment and medical. That also allows us to balance risk.

That is there for your consideration. Now for the exciting part.

International mass torts, and unlocking global growth opportunities through our strategic expansion, and over to you, Simon, onto page or slide 20.

Thanks, Carolyn. Good morning everyone.

We've had a busy 6 months in this new part of our business. As Carolyn said, it is new and developing, but we're gaining some significant momentum.

The underlying strategic objective of our international mass torts practice is simply this: to source and fund very large-scale class actions out of the United States that we can litigate into countries where we hold a class action presence, Australia obviously being the largest of those countries. If we move to slide 20, I'll just talk you through the operating structure of this part of our business.

We run it through what we call a hub-and-spoke strategy. We've developed a hub in the United States.

There's a small team of us in the US, and our job is to find the right cases that can be litigated and funded down into other countries. We then have three operating spokes currently.

Australia, obviously, is the largest. We have filed three very large class actions on a protected basis: the Johnson & Johnson talc litigation, which you may have seen in the media recently; the proton-pump inhibitors class action; and the 3M combat earplugs class action.

In New Zealand, we are investigating our first very large mass tort class action, which we expect to file in the next 90 days or so. Then the newest part of the IMT business is our Thailand practice.

We've set up an operation in Bangkok, Thailand, and a Johnson & Johnson talc class action is the first of those cases that will be filed. The structure we operate in Thailand is in concert with a partner litigation firm headquartered out of Bangkok.

Behind that, we have a large pipeline of cases that the team is working up, which will flow into the spokes. They cut across a variety of areas: chemical cases, environmental contamination; consumer gaming, social media addiction cases are becoming prevalent, and are the subject of the pipeline; e-commerce cases; and emissions cases.

Moving to slide 21, I'll just walk you through the funding model for the international mass torts practice. Firstly, we are pleased to announce we have secured a funding facility from an international litigation funder of up to $40 million Australian dollars for a single, large mass tort case that we will be litigating in Australia.

This is a first for Shine and we think the largest funding secured for a single case in Australian class action history. Secondly, we have been negotiating for some time with a number of international funders to develop a portfolio fund, which will enable us to litigate multiple class actions in one funding facility.

We are at a very mature stage in those negotiations, and hope to have something to talk to market about in the not-too-distant future in that respect. Move to slide 22, I'll just walk you through the regulatory model.

The United States is slightly different to Australia. As shareholders of Shine would know, you can be a non-lawyer and own a law firm in Australia.

The United States is far more restricted, and there are only two states that permit that structure. One is Arizona, and you need to apply to the Supreme Court for an operating license.

We applied some 12 months ago and received our operating license from the Supreme Court, we are up and running in the United States. We are the first international law firm to secure an ABS license in the United States, which we felt was significant.

We have acquired a small personal injury practice in Tempe, Arizona, we're running a PI practice out of Arizona. The strategic intent of the license is it opens up significant opportunities to dovetail into our international mass torts practice.

Then finally, slide 23, I'll just walk you through the operating model of the IMT business. We have a US market that we source our cases from.

We partner with multiple United States law firms, and we select law firms that have already litigated the cases we are contemplating filing in Australia, or are currently litigating, we can share expertise with our US counterparts. We then source the cases, investigate the cases, and then bring them down into the spokes.

The target practice areas across our portfolio include product liability cases, consumer protection, chemical cases, environmental cases, disaster, and pharmaceutical and medical devices. That concludes IMT, Carolyn.

Thank you very much, Simon. I'm just going to talk now, we're looking at slide 25, about our technology and innovation.

This is on the minds of every business, every entity throughout the world, and in Australia, it's no difference, especially in all of these listed presentations. We have an Emerging Technology Centre.

That center is absolutely focused on how we manage our data, clean our data, put our data in the cloud, and then access our data in a more efficient, commercial, business-oriented way, given the tools that exist today that didn't exist 3 short years ago, let alone 10 years ago. We're really focused about how that can help us drive our business.

We've called it in the slideshows here, but we are working with various proofs of concepts in order to drive efficiencies through our various business lines using AI and other technologies, not just AI, and to understand what AI really means. We know how to do it, how to enact it, how to incorporate it, but what is the actual real outcome in terms of cybersecurity, in terms of the ability of staff to understand and access, in terms of reporting, and what that means, and how it's recreated in different ways.

We're working through that now so that the proof of concepts, the types of activities that we're piloting actually can be understood and taken on immediately by the whole business. We're excited about that, and we'll have more to talk about in our full year results.

The data is, as I mentioned before, is at the center of all of this. It is every business, including ours, and we are well progressed in managing that with our data platform, with our data lake in the cloud.

We've always been a data-driven business. We're very good at data, and reporting, but to use the technology that's around at the moment to its fullest extent and train people up along the way.

This will of course work out in the end to gains in margin, expansion in revenue growth to access other markets in different ways, and help us with how we budget in future years. Just wanted to let you know that we are on to this quietly and efficiently, and we'll let you know when it lands.

I think that will be just as exciting as the work we're doing, Simon, in international mass torts. Of course, this applies to the group worldwide.

We are looking at how we accommodate the US, Thailand, New Zealand, etc., into that whole realm. I'm going to skip slide 26 in terms of the timing that we've got, because it really just is more about the technology ROI pathways there for you to read.

Over to you, Marc, for capital management.

Thanks, Carolyn. Just talk to slide 28 for those that read the deck.

Just touching on capital management. Obviously, a very focused area within Shine.

The order run down the page is not reflective of priorities, but at the top there, we've got shareholder returns. Obviously, we're in that lucky position now with fully franked dividends with the 1.5 cents declared for the half.

That's again a continuation of what's sort of been the recent history of interim dividends to shareholders. The share buyback, there were 380,000 shares bought back in the half year.

Again, as I said, the program was renewed in September with 10% capacity. When capital management allows, I'm sure that we'll be being active in that buyback program.

Obviously, from a growth perspective, as Carolyn touched on, the growth investment using capital, the technology center, AI, CRM, the international expansion, which Simon alluded to. We did acquire those files in the first half as well, and we are still looking to try and add more quality files through purchase through the second half and the future as well.

I guess there's a balancing of the capital for the growth on that. All those items as well.

Working capital optimization, we are looking at those various funding mechanisms for class actions, including some that are well progressed as per Simon's earlier comments. We also got the disbursement funding still in place, and we're looking internally how we can make that a bit more efficient and provide some more value through to the group.

Obviously balance sheet, net debt's at $79.9 million, less than 30 odd percent on a debt-to-equity ratio. The average cost is around 8%, which isチューブ[?]

with all the chance of interest rate movements. Again, I guess all those together, there is a large focus on capital management, where best to deploy capital as we can.

Also just slide 29, just very briefly, just to show the history of the dividends. Obviously, in this graph here, we've put the unfranked and the franked dividend.

Shareholders can see what the historical sort of trend has been. It has fairly consistent dividends from 20 2021 to 2026 from an interim perspective.

Just touching on some of the operating cost side of things. As I've mentioned earlier, that from an employee expense point of view, the focus on efficiency is definitely something that the business has been targeted on the last 6 months, increasing legal output per fee earner, and just managing the head count in the right head count for the right regions as well.

Overheads, it's a fairly stable overhead business, always looking for efficiency and gains where possible, but it is, again, something that we do keep a very close eye on, and it's good to see that that hasn't increased over the last half year. I guess just the last point on the right-hand side there of slide 30, the discipline for overheads will continue into the second half of 2026, obviously with investment in IT and other growth initiatives, hopefully we can actually, over time, further attack that cost base.

Thank you. All right, we're toward the end.

We're on slide 32. It's to wrap up.

Before I do that, I'd like to just say that this year, calendar year 2026, 2026, is in fact Shine's 50th year as a business. Continuous operations from a small, humble, but obviously clearly creative beginnings in Toowoomba, to now a dominant Australian firm in the two industry segments that we operate, PI and class actions, and, as you've heard from Simon, international, using international mass torts as the lever to grow our business beyond our shores.

It's all in our 50th year, that this is sort of common and in what were they thinking, of course, happy people with that. We're really so proud to be an Australian firm, our 50th year, and celebrating that in this calendar year.

Just wanted to say it without being silent about that activity that underpins our culture. We are a leading firm in a fragmented PI sector, meaning there's lots of room for movement in the 70% that ourselves and the two other majors don't already have.

Our national footprint is extensive, and it is suburban and regionally oriented as well. We've sort of alluded to this, Marc and I differently, our province strategy is being examined.

It will have to change, it will change strategically so that we keep pace with the trends, demographic, psychographic, and also people and work trends. Client impact is $11+ billion recovered for 130,000+ clients in that time.

Our brand strength and reputation act as something that drives us. It says here competitive moat, but we put that in to see if you're all chuckling on your side of the fence.

Our investment in technology, in licenses, in AI investigation, in emerging tech as a concept is baked into the budgets, and we're alive to how that will also drive our evolving business in terms of our operations and client satisfaction, and the dual engine of PI and class actions is where we continue to sit. There's a last slide there at 33, we've sort of said it all.

That's for you to read later. Now we're at the time of 11:10, and Marc, you are looking at any questions that may have come through.

Operator, are there any questions on the line?

Oh, morning, all. Just wondering firstly, could you just talk through the provisioning levels in the PI book in the first half of 2026 versus the first half of 2025, and just whether that's had any impact on the revenue uplift?

Thanks, Peter. The provisioning levels in PI have actually increased slightly in the first half of 2026 as opposed to 2025.

When you say is there an impact on revenue, obviously increased provisioning there is a small impact on revenue, but I think the level we're at now with the provisioning, it's only gone up a small amount from memory. It's just again a bit of conservatism in some of the matters that may be aged or we're maybe paying a bit of a closer attention to.

There was a small uplift, but nothing across-the-board material.

Sort of on a like-for-like basis, the provisioning was more conservative, if it was the same, the revenue number would be higher?

You could view it that way, yeah. Yeah.

Thanks. Then just in terms of, I guess, the file acquisitions, will those file acquisitions that you made in the first half, will they benefit the second half?

Is that sort of run rate that you achieved in the first half, you could repeat that sort of growth in the second half?

It's a good question. What I will probably say on the file acquisitions is that we identified one early in the first half that we were actually able to convert and do a deal with.

We have, through the half, probably spoken to or dealt with another five or six different people that were looking to either sell their files or their business or a combination of both. We haven't merged any of those at this stage, I wouldn't want to commit and say second half we'll do more.

I think what you'll probably see with file acquisitions is that will probably be a bit lumpy as we come. We might do 160 that we've done, and then in the second half we might do one that's slightly smaller, and then next half we might do one that might be 200 and a bit over that.

I think they're going to be different sizes, depending on the people that we're in discussions with, and they do range from a sole trader who's got his own or her own legal firm to someone who might have five or six lawyers working for them. I wouldn't want to commit to an answer right now, but they will be very varied over time.

Okay. Then just in terms of class actions, can you just talk to the sort of revenue outlook, I guess, for the second half and maybe into FY 2027 just with the sort of existing domestic portfolio and then the international business, and how that major class action that's been funded with the new fund is going to sort of impact revenues in second half and then into 2027?

Yeah.

On slide 17, Peter, in that middle column, we'll call it that, I think we've noted there there's $8 million locked up in class action investigations. There's probably I'd say just a bit over half of that is nearing the point where we get that matter funded and we can convert that into an active matter, thereby recognizing that revenue.

Immediately you can see, just there alone there's probably $4 [million?] or $5 million that hopefully in the second half we can convert across.

That will sort of, as we convert investigations to active matters, we try and backfill with investigations that roll like the matters. We're still ramping that business up, and still increasing in headcount and matter numbers.

That's probably the more immediate looking view. From an international mass torts side of things, probably we have secured that $40 million funding facility, but it's probably too early in the piece to actually start giving any longer-term view on what that might look like, because there's still a lot of moving parts and a lot of detail to work through.

Even in relation to the three matters that Simon had in his slide deck there. I'd dare say by the end of this financial year and when we come out in August, we'll be able to provide a lot more color around what that does actually look like from a financial perspective.

Okay. Then just to clarify, Marc, you're saying that of that 7.8, half of that might drop in potentially as revenue against that sort of high $17 million base in the first half?

Uh-huh.

Yeah.

Yeah. Maybe.

Maybe. Maybe.

Yeah.

It

can go either way, obviously.

Just the last one, maybe for Simon. Just could you give us a little bit more detail on just the partner involvement in these class actions?

Just try to understand what the roles are.

Sure, Peter. We select firms, as I said earlier, that have either already litigated cases that we're contemplating litigating or are currently involved in them.

The role they play with us is they assist us in how we develop evidence to run the litigation in Australia. They assist us in respect of the strategies that have been utilized in the US litigation.

They have some operating restrictions on them. For example, if they've settled a case in the United States, there's certain things they can't tell us, and we understand that.

They work with us side-by-side throughout the course of the spoke litigation, if I can call it that, to help us build the best evidence, select the best experts, know how to get the best discovery in the litigation, and then I call it intellectual IP about how to deal with the respondents who are all largely US multinational corporations.

Right. Thanks.

Congrats on the result, guys.

Thanks, Peter.

Thank you very much. Thank you for your attendance today.

As usual, John George, our investor relations manager, will be in contact with many of you as a follow-up to this call, as we usually do. It's been great talking to you again.

Onward and upward.