Oh, thank you very much. Welcome everybody.

It is a pleasure to be speaking with you again this time at the full year. With me today is Mark Devine, our Chief Executive Officer, and also John George, our investment relations advisor.

Simon Morrison, who has undertaken many of these presentations to the market, has moved from Managing Director to Executive Director and head of international mass torts. We'll be taking the meeting today and Simon, no doubt, will be listening in his head of international mass torts role, which is very exciting for the business.

What we're going to do is obviously take you through the results. You've got the pack, downloaded it no doubt, we will be referring to page numbers on the way through should we need to so everybody can keep up to speed or up to date with as we're flicking here in the room in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, our head office for Shine Justice.

We do have a an improved result this year, FY '26. Up 2.3% on revenue, EBITDA up 7%, and net profit restored, which is very important course.

Now, I want to point out that's on a statutory basis. We will talk about the one-off transaction that is affected our results for this year.

That will be clearly articulated in the presentation as we go through. We ended the year, 30 June '26, reporting higher revenue, improved earnings, stable operating cash flow, and a well-funded balance sheet.

This improvement was driven by our growth in legal work, both in personal injury and in class actions, and the higher fees billed, higher average new file fees, controlling still our cost, backend cost, our cost management is very important for us to keep a focus on, and then continuing to invest in emerging technology platforms talk about, and of course, international growth initiatives. You'll hear us talk about IMT, that is short in Shine talk for international mass torts, and we'll talk about that more in the presentation as we have some exciting news about our international growth in that regard.

Let me hand straight over to Mark Devine, and take us through the numbers, Mark.

Thank you, Carolyn. Morning, everyone.

As Carolyn said, we'll reference the slide deck as published on the ASX this morning. I'll give a brief overview on the high-level numbers.

As Carolyn said, there is sort of two sets if you like, statutory numbers. We thought it very important to call out the impact of the announcement that we released last Friday being that class action, legacy class action, sorry, which we've had to impair some revenue and some disbursements on.

I'll get into that in a minute. On slide 3, adjusted revenue of $209.2 million sorry, statutory revenue of $209.2 million, which is up 2.3% as Carolyn said.

Net work in progress is $366.6 million, so that's fairly stable. Obviously, added WIP and billed-off WIP, which is great.

Just in the company's history, we're at $12 billion-plus in damages recovered for our clients, which is a great number. We finished the year with around 900 staff in 50-plus offices both in Australia, in Australia, New Zealand, Thailand, and the US.

Increasing our domestic footprint as well as evolving our international presence. If you move to slide 4, we want to get this one up front and center and explain the impacts of the write-down on the legacy class action.

You'll see on the table there where it really impacted was the revenue line. There was an $11.2 million increase in the constraint rate carried against that matter.

What that basically means is that we had recognized revenue up to $11.2 million on that matter due to the outcome of the court proceeding interlocutory proceeding, sorry, in the US. Under accounting standards, we've had to provision against that.

That reduced the top-line revenue by $11.2 million. Without that transaction, the adjusted number is $220.4 million, which on a like-for-like basis compared to last year would be an increase of 7.8%.

We don't discount the adjustment that has occurred. If it didn't occur, we would have been up around 8% on revenue for the year, which I think is a great outcome.

The other part of that transaction was the disbursements that were carried on that matter, which Shine had carried, were carrying on their balance sheet. Again, we've had to sort of impair those, and that was $1.8 million, which made our operating expenses $175.9 for the year, which is a 5.6% increase on the previous year.

Obviously, in the previous year, there was an adjustment for a fair value loss of circa $10 million that was included there as well. Take all that into account, I think the headline number is the EBITDA statutory of 31.7, the adjusted EBITDA taking into account, backing out those transactions, $44.7, a 13.9% increase for the year, which, again, I think, just is reflective of the focus on that business and how we're running both the personal injury and the class action business to get such a quite an impressive increase outside of that that issue.

Net profit after tax, the bottom line on a statutory basis, $6.7 million taking into account the adjusting items and the tax effect of those items, the actual adjusted amount is $15.8 against $9.7 adjusted for last year, a 62.9% increase, which is a, again, a terrific result. Underlying that, we've got earnings per share statutory 5.74 against an adjusted of 11.19 an 87% increase on last year.

Quite a good result with the exception of that legacy matter, which has had a obviously a substantial impact. I think we'd consider that a one-off type scenario.

Move to slide 5. This gives you sort of the snapshot on the adjusted basis, which basically just covers all the numbers I've went through: $220 revenue, $44.7 adjusted EBITDA, operating cash flow $19 million, that was stable for the year.

There is some WIP that was built up which we didn't bill off during the year, which, it would have been nice to bill off and increase the cash flow. Also, there were some investments as Carolyn mentioned in emerging technology and some of our operating costs to get in front of where we need to be from a, emerging technology perspective.

Move to slide 6. That's the two-segment business that Shine has: personal injury, obviously, and class actions.

Personal injury side had some good growth during the year, both in revenue, EBITDA, while maintaining its cost base. Class actions, again, grew during the year on an adjusted basis and obviously unadjusted it it it made a loss.

Personal injury EBITDA $36.6 million, up 18.4% on last year's number. Off the base of $180.9 million worth of revenue, which is up from $166 million in the previous year.

Current sort of footprint, there's 47 personal injury offices around Australia and New Zealand and the US with around 540-plus personal injury staff. Around 8.5% of the market share according to the last IBISWorld report, which is back in 2025, which still means for us, which is the focus is still 73% of the market share outside the sort of the top 3 PI firms.

Still a lot of market share that out there that Shine can go after and try and increase its percentage. Class actions, as I said, on the adjusted EBITDA of $8.2 million, which was up from last year of $7.7, a good increase.

There has been investment in class actions during the year in investigation work. That's obviously work we recognize, oh, sorry, work we do, we don't recognize it as revenue until such time as it it reaches the test of being an active, funded matter.

We did have a build-up of WIP on the class action side, which we're hoping once we start to file some of these cases this year it will release into both the P&L and we'll get funded, the cash flows for them. Currently, the class actions team operating out of six Shine offices across Australia, New Zealand, and the US.

There's 100-plus staff in the team. There's an intention to grow that as we get more of these matters through the pipeline both domestically and through the international mass torts space.

Moving to slide 7, just some high-level commentary on the results and what drove those results. As I said, adjusted revenue up 7.8% $220.4 million.

Personal injury was a big part of that. What we saw during the year was we were getting more legal work per fee earner out of our teams, which is great.

The head count that we budgeted for last year we didn't actually achieve, but it was offset by that increase in legal work per fee earner. That's a really good outcome, and something that we're pushing to continue through FY '27.

Class actions, similar vein. A lot of work done on the legal work per fee earner, they also increased.

Some of that is investigation WIP, which is as I said, we don't recognize any of that until such time as we can file it and have it funded and have lead plaintiffs and all sorts of things. Another positive during the year is staff turnover reduced.

It was significantly higher than than where it is at the moment, 24 months ago, I think when I joined. The team have worked really hard at that retention, keeping staff, yeah, change the way we do things, and just making sure Shine is a place that that people want to come and work at.

Positively, as well, on that staff retention front, we have a lot of people that have left Shine that have been good leavers that wanted to come back. They are coming back probably more than what we actually anticipated.

As I said, earnings recovery, net profit after tax up adjusted compared to last year, adjusted NPAT up compared to last year. The basic EPS is also more or less double what it was last year, as well.

Really good outcome on the adjusted basis. I spoke briefly about cash generation.

There were some positives underneath the the sort of the flat headline number being the fees billed during the year for personal injury were higher than last year. We're seeing higher higher values per matter than what we were last year, as well.

Some of those lower-quantum matters, we're sort of I guess working in a in a different way to get better outcomes from a cash perspective. Class actions improved their fees billed during the year based off the number of resolutions that occurred and settlements that occurred during the year.

There's a couple more of those that that have pushed into FY '27, which will hopefully resolve and and settle and we get paid for in the next sort of six months. I've just put a comment there about towards normalized earnings.

We don't really like to report adjusted numbers and will only do so where they are material one-off events. I think we dealt with the fair value loss on deferred consideration last year.

We've unfortunately had this $13 million impact this year which we've called out. It's our goal to to, I guess, get the business in a position where the numbers are the numbers that we're reporting on.

It's a stable business. It's growing, and, yeah, hopefully just reporting normalized earnings, which is a goal of mine.

Having said that, I'll hand over to Carolyn now to go through slide 9.

Thank you, Mark. Great CFO overview, thank you.

All right, I want to go into personal injury and also class actions, a little bit more detail. You'll see on slide 9, we've pulled out personal injury scorecard, here are the numbers: $180.9 million in revenue, EBITDA for that segment, $36.6 million.

Throughout the year, throughout the 12 months, 4,000 clients have been compensated. We settled the matter and we paid them their money for the wrongs that befell them during the period that we had their file.

The client is at the heart of everything we do at Shine, we delight in these numbers, they're important to us. Damages secured for the year, $800 million-plus.

Then, of course, we've got to replenish the cabinet the whole time, 5,900 new files were opened during the period. As mentioned before, we're one of the largest PI practices in Australia.

We've got a national scale. You will see through various reports, there are sort of varying numbers about office numbers, meaning the number of offices that we have.

That's because we've adopted a forward-looking and as flexible as one can be property strategy for our business right across Australia. We are in cap cities as we're in regional centers, some would say a few rural, none remote as yet.

However, what we are doing is if we see a demographic shift or there is a focus in an area that we know that we can respond to and help people in need, then we will go there, but we will use a more flexible office location and and outsource strategy. This is not a pin drop, I'm not talking about that, it's about how we can have a presence in these areas, and that's important.

You can see in the table on the pack to the left, there is the statutory PI revenue and EBITDA trends. Again, statutory because we we want to show it in that way given this presentation.

We are, having reached a $180.9 million, we did that because we continued with our disciplined approach. We have had success in turning around some of the the business areas of the jurisdictions in and matter types that are that needed to have some special care.

We have done that particularly in Victoria. It's a great success story for us, we've been there for 21 years.

It's it's hugely important as part of our whole, and the Victorian team there have done outstanding outstanding work for our clients and for the PI practice in the state of Victoria. We've said before, we've improved efficiency in legal work by upping the legal work per fee earner and the recovery rates, and we have the highest fees billed on record in our company in FY '26.

We continued to really assiduously acquire new files, good-quality new files for specific branches in '26. We are going to be far more assertive about that in '27, and that will be talked about later in the forward-looking files.

Then, of course, Mark talked about our lower turnover. This has been two years of a really focused holistic approach to our staff, their well-being, and their connection, engagement with Shine.

We are thrilled that we had so many of our staff return. That was an overt program.

We we we meant to reconnect with our good leavers, and we are so thrilled that they're back. Lisa Flynn is the Chief Legal Officer of PI and class actions.

I believe she's listening today. We, though, have a head of class actions in Craig Allsopp who is doing an outstanding job in that segment of the business.

He leads practice leaders across the east coast, Australia, for what we call domestic class actions. He and his people also, yeah, also work with him tirelessly on that.

Now, the CFO has just pointed out that I have finger-fumbled a a one of the the slides. I'm going I'm going to let it go though, because people can read that.

It talks about our upside opportunity in our deep pipeline, but I want to I want to go to our class action scorecard. The slide just so I mucked everyone around, the slide is 11, that's where I am.

Good, I hope you are too out there. Okay.

Continuing on that slide, our first class action was won in New Zealand, and it was for Hino, that's a real breakthrough. We have six in-principle settlement agreements reached for over $290 million.

That's going to be an inflow. We have greater focus on investigation to filing velocity, moving the matters through more quickly.

We have tighter portfolio governance. Craig's office of the head of class actions has been supplemented by some more specialist staff, especially looking at prospects to investigation, investigation to filing matters.

That's to really drive domestic class actions. We want to make sure that that continues to be driving along with PI as the engine of our Australian business, and then when we move to the what we're doing with international mass torts, that will help us out there credibly.

Okay. Let's move to slide 12.

Where I talked about just before the upside opportunity in the deep pipeline, we've got 48 matters open. I've talked about pipeline momentum.

We've talked about the adjusted revenue. We have talked about portfolio funding in the half.

Now, portfolio funding is our term for looking internationally for funding opportunities. We were successful, and we did report this in the half, of securing a $40 million funding arrangement with an international funder to drive our Talc Australia matter forward, and that's being actively worked on at the moment.

With portfolio funding, we are talking to a number of funders who will look at matters that we have on hand and will help us with additional funding from different and separate sources to actually really drive our business. What we're showing here is that we have a deep pipeline, we can flow those matters into that type of funding regime.

Also, I'd like to point out that we are diversified across a number of class action sectors. We're not just dependent on one or two.

You can see those on the right side and the little chart there. We're across environmental, medical, very good work in First Nations and social justice, that's that's a real key, heartfelt area for us, consumer, employment, shareholder, a lot of people in shareholder, are we, and financial services, are we in that area.

That our diversification helps us manage our concentration risk. Let's move to the next slide, number 13.

Talked earlier about IMT or international mass torts. This is where we sit at the moment.

We have a USA hub, it's a hub-and-spoke model. The hub is in the USA, it's in New York.

That hub finds, works with, defines, sources funding for, funding for, and then exports, that's our term again, to these to our its international spokes. Its international spokes if you're sitting from a US hub perspective would be to Australia, we already have a very mature, well-functioning class actions business.

As well as domestic class actions, we will be looking and are looking at internationally funded spoke class actions. That's our terminology, just thought I'd explain it a little bit more.

The same with New Zealand, we're already in New Zealand. Then we have developed a class actions business there, and it was thrilling to get our our first successful resolution there with Hino.

Then our Asia spoke. Asia spoke is Thailand.

We have an office in Thailand, we have employees in Thailand, and we are working up cases in investigation in Thailand. There are plans to make this even more broad in years to come, and we'll tell you about that.

We'll be able to perhaps share some other news in the half about that. Just repeating that Simon Morrison has moved from Managing Director to Executive Director and and the head of IMT, international mass torts.

He is running that for the business Shine Justice, and there is no stopping Simon. Okay.

Moving to the next slide, it's about strategy and growth. Everybody's talking about AI.

We prefer to talk about emerging technology. In that AI is a subset, but emerging technologies are larger than, bigger than AI.

It all is important that organizations get a grip on all of this. Our roadmap, which we shared previously, was a three-year roadmap.

We said in FY '25 that we're going to set the foundations, had to figure out what was going on, everybody did in the world actually, from a corporate perspective. We we created the emerging technology center so that activity could happen all around the business, but we had clear sight on what that activity was so that we can then bring it into a channel which allows us to determine how we might replicate or how we might fail fast, typical stuff.

In that year, we put the infrastructure in place, and there was an investment to do so. The year that we're talking about now, FY '26, we informed you all that it was a proof-of-concept year, that we weren't going to go big solution, huge activity in mainstream systems, etc., etc., that claim they could solve the world with their AI plug-ins.

We said we were going to look at proof of concept throughout our business, throughout the jurisdictions, throughout the matter types, and throughout the supporting business services inputs, and that is what we've done. We have noticed improved productivity, we have insights, and we have operational efficiency, but that is yet to come through in the results.

That will be through '27 and '28. '27 is the acceleration year where we will get sustainable productivity and service improvements that we can quantify.

The maturity of '28, it's embedded, it's done. We will continue to evolve as every as the industry does, but we have got a total grasp on it.

That the the the other half of the page that talks about where we are now is really giving some color to the FY '26 year. We've got the emerging technology center.

We have put in AI guardrails and a governance structure, which is incredibly important. We are looking at agentic and automation platforms, and we have created our own agents where they where they impact our business.

We're very happy with where we are in in this regard. Our client intake platform continues to be Salesforce.

We are utilizing Agentforce, the extension, the AI and other automation extension of Salesforce, and that is linking to other systems and other agents and connectors in the business. We are getting our data in very good order.

It's going into a a data foundational data platform. We're a Microsoft shop.

We're using Microsoft Fabric, and that project is very well-advanced. We have good, clean data so we can get good, clean reporting at the desktop happening as we accelerate in FY '27.

Then just to mention our people platform, that is not agentic, but it is a a new platform that will help fuel all of these activities. Hence, we call it the Emerging Technology Center, because it has these inputs in it.

Mark, we're up to 16, if I've got the slide number right. Over to you.

Thank you, Carolyn. Slide 16 is just a very high-level summary of the balance sheet position.

As we said, at 30 June, the net assets position $260 million. Bit of a down on last year.

Obviously, that takes into account the the legacy issue we spoke about earlier. Cash and cash equivalents down for the year from 18.1 to 12.5.

Again, probably an investment in the leading technologies and some other IT platforms there as well as the investment in IMT matters as well as some class actions, which will come to be realized as cash in '27 and beyond. Net debt increased slightly on FY '25.

I think that net debt should hopefully reduce as we move forward. The increase was due in some part to the movement of a final tranche of disbursement funding, blind disbursements that we were carrying into our core debt stack.

Even though that's increased the debt, it's definitely an interest saving on the back end of that. Obviously, net work in progress, I spoke about earlier, pretty flat on where we're at.

The focus for '27 is to definitely, as much as we love file intake, which we need, to build some of that off as well. Looking forward to that through FY '27.

Just a couple of other comments there. The group has $119.7 million of financing facilities available.

We have headroom at the moment of 44 sorry, $41.4 million. Our majority of facilities run to March '28, still plenty of time before we need to renew those.

Importantly, the group complied with all our banking covenants during the year. Franking credits are still available, which is good, that supports the continuation of franked dividends.

As you'll have seen, the company has declared a dividend for the year. Net debt, as I said, yeah, increased a bit.

Hopefully, as we increase the work in progress being realized as fees, we'll start to actually reduce that a little bit and come forward with that. On slide 17, as I spoke then around the dividend, 3.5 cents fully franked final dividend being declared for the year, payable in October.

Again, I think that's representative of the board's commitment to return value where we can to shareholders. Takes the total dividend for the FY '26 year to 4 cents per share.

I mentioned the franking credits earlier. In total, thus far, the company has bought back 3.87 million of shares.

That was in the scheme up to September '25. We didn't actually acquire any in the scheme that was started in October '25 just due to the balancing of the capital requirements with some of the investment we've done during the year.

The capital allocation framework there just called out the growth investment, we have invested in the Emerging Technology Center, international expansion. We did buy some personal injury files, which we're looking to continue to do more of.

As I said, it's a balance against growth of the business versus the returns to to shareholders. With that, I'll hand back to Carolyn to do the strategy and growth and the outlook.

All right, let's go straight to FY '27 outlook in the orange box. We are continuing to have momentum in our personal injury segment.

We are going to build on our improved legal work per fee earner. We are going to look at containing our write-offs just in the way that we look at how we manage the conduct of the matter, the file as it goes through.

We've got more disciplined focus on that and it is always had focus, but this has been really a a point for us to concentrate on and we have. We've done very well in fees billed compared to pre previous years, that will continue.

We are obviously, it's all about the client, our resolution quantum is going to continue to be very, very strong. We'll continue to pursue acquisitions, as both Mark and I have alluded to.

They must, of course, align though to a strategic plan. It's very easy to buy files and businesses that are that that don't add value to the extent that we want them to, but we are going to have a stronger focus on that in '27.

Class actions is focusing or will focus on filing more matters and increasing investigation to filing velocity. That we've got the processes, the people, the systems now in place better to do that.

We, in our domestic class actions, continue to see it as the engine with PI to be the sort of the business sits on top of that as we then focus on our international mass torts strategy, so that we can give Simon the the time and the space to really make great great leaps and and bounds in that area. Our international mass torts hub, remember that's in the USA, in New York, is going to continue to source and develop matters for Australia, New Zealand, and Thailand.

There will be other jurisdictions that we're looking at in '27. I must mention we also have a personal injury law firm in the state of Arizona that allows an alternative business structure to be set up, ABS.

We as though we're a law firm, we're considered to be an ABS in that state. We have an active PI business that is now has now been stood up, it has staff, it has files, it has outcomes, it has it is a burdgeoning business.

That is managed, if you like, in bulk of our PI activity by Lisa Flynn as the CLO, but of course within the American jurisdiction. When I say managed, I should say administratively supported.

It's managed totally independently, of course, in the USA. We can use our systems to help support administratively.

We delivered growth in '26. We did have that one-off transaction that has been talked about quite a few times that shows how well we did underneath in in '26.

We are expecting to see growth again in both personal injury and class actions and in profitability alongside an increase in group cash flow. That is where we end up.

I must finish by talking about it has been our 50th year this year. Cap to Toowoomba, Shine 50 is the is the banner under which we we operate that whole year, this whole year, calendar '26, of operations.

We've had external outreach, we've had stakeholder and staff interaction, we've had tours around regional and rural and remote areas with a little car that we've kitted out called the Shinemobile. Might sound a bit sort of a bit funny and interesting saying this in a presentation to the market, but we cannot let our 50th year go by.

We started in 1976 in Toowoomba, from humble beginnings, through the east coast, through Australia, and now internationally in this our calendar and financial '26 year. We're very proud of that as as a company and and a firm.

With that in mind, we will look at taking questions.

Good morning, team. Done on the result, and thanks for taking my questions.

Just a couple from me. Just on the outlook, you've obviously called out an expected increase in group cash flow.

I just want to narrow down on PI. Just given it's a little bit more predictable, should we be thinking that cash flow sort of grows with segment profitability or is emerging technology going to mean a faster WIP conversion and and and maybe we see a step change in the cash conversion versus segment profitability there yeah within within PI?

Thanks, Tom. With on the PI side, obviously there's a few competing priorities, for want of a better word at the moment, being, we want to grow the business.

That file acquisition opportunity that we want to really push harder on will obviously consume cash if we can identify files that we want to want to acquire. Generally, yeah, growth in PI should lead to higher fees billed and more cash in the door.

I guess we've just got to remember, some of the work we've done to sharpen focus and execution. These matters are a long-tail matter, but we're also looking at velocity, trying to get velocity in, matters closing out earlier.

Some of the actions we're taking now will show through, maybe not all in this FY '27, but definitely FY '28 and beyond. You'll see the the benefit of that from a cash perspective.

From the emerging technology side of things, we have not banked or baked any upside from a revenue/cash perspective into our books for FY '27. Referring back to the roadmap, yeah, we sort of started in FY '25, developed the Emerging Technology Center in FY '26 and and have some really good things in our minds and also starting to actually become reality.

We'll try and push those out in FY '27, and again FY '28 should start to see some benefit from from that, but it won't happen yeah in FY '27. At a point in time, I think most companies worldwide that are dealing with emerging technology and the commercial realities of the what the outputs of that are, yeah, at a point in time there has to be either, efficiency savings, which means we can push more files through or other benefits that come from it.

Appreciate that, thanks. Second question's just on class actions again on on the cash conversion.

You called out the $40 million of funding from an external funder. I'm just trying to get a sense of sort of the the cash benefits of the external funding from that $40 million for FY '27.

Is that expected to materially drive operating cash conversion just because you're not carrying the matter yourselves? Then secondly, with the pipeline of of other matters you want to want to move into an external funding mechanism, can you just step us through sort of benefits across the business there from a a cash perspective that you expect?

I won't give you dollar values, but just theoretically, which is what we're actually seeing come through, the the $40 million we we announced back in February, obviously that's not $40 million dropped in our bank account and off you go. We're drawing down on that amount as each month as we go through the matter.

The matter obviously again is expected to last a couple of years, so that funding will last along that that same timeframe as well. Class actions in general, we're still carrying some old matters where Shine had fully funded or Shine had partially funded, and in some cases we're still funding those ourselves to get to the settlement of the matter.

Every new matter that we're bringing online, the ideal scenario for Shine is to, if it's one that we want funded, go out and get funding for it. We've obviously got the carriage that we normally take on all those class actions that we get returned to us at the end of the matter.

The idea is that we get all funded matters moving forward. We're still in that sort of 50-50 bucket where we've got old matters we're trying to resolve and finalize and get our investment back, which could be sizable from those, as well as, getting that that fluid monthly, quarterly cash flow coming in from from new matters that we're we're we're running and that are funded.

It's a bit of both. You'll see an uptick in '27 from the class actions fees because we're moving to that.

You'll also probably see some settlements coming in, which gives us a a little bit of a, an uplift in cash because we've getting the WIP back from the previous two years or three years. You've still got that sort of unevenness coming through.

Each year moving forward now, it should flatten a bit a lot more, which I know will make me happy knowing we've got all funded matters that are, fairly stable, and then at the end, you still get these uplifts where you, where you're successful on either a GCO basis or there's an uplift component.

Great. Thanks for taking my questions.

Thanks, Tom.

morning. Thanks for the presentation.

Just a question on the outlook. You've guided to revenue growth across PI and class actions.

I'm just wondering, PI grew at 8% fairly consistent consistently through FY '26. Is that sort of high single-digit level achievable in FY '27?

Uh

yeah, we think so. As I said, there's a number of parts to the PI strategy, being our our growth branches, footprint increases that we've done.

We've actually, stepped back away from some areas which weren't performing that well for us. Obviously, the big part is the file acquisitions and, how how heavily we can get into that.

Look, I think there's still growth there for sure around that same level, comfortable with. It'll depend on, some of those other factors as to whether or not we can push it up higher in '27.

It'll get there eventually. To to go and acquire files is not a a a pro- process you can do in a in a month or two months.

It sometimes takes a bit longer, it just depends what opportunities we can capitalize on yeah, and when.

Thanks, Mark. Just on class actions, just curious, what sort of growth are you thinking you can achieve there?

I'm just looking at the sort of number of class actions actually filed is is fairly flat or sort of down actually year on year. Um and I'm so I'm just wondering where the growth's coming from.

Then within that question, with the IMT strategy, is that has that actually contributed any revenue to date? What's the thinking in terms of contribution for for '27?

Thanks. I'll maybe start at your last point in part of your question.

The IMT strategy and what's it contributed, it has. Obviously, Simon's been in the States now for a couple of years on and off.

He splits his time between Australia and the States. There are matters that he has sourced from the States that he's pushed into to Australia, and there's definitely opportunity for others that we're looking at for New Zealand and as we said Thailand.

There's a there's a contribution there for FY '26. It's by no means material to what it what it can be in the future.

Again, the whole point of the IMT strategy was to get cases that were, run and won or or run and look like being won in the US, bring them out to other locations where we can, run them off the same, the same information, the same evidence, and whatnot. There is upside.

We're continually are working on IMT and and and sourcing that for for Australia, New Zealand, and Thailand and and other places. It could be, that these are not, they're not domestic class actions on the lower end, which could be a $20 or $30 million settlement, these are, these are quite material and large cases that are run in the US, and and we're hoping, we can monetize that in all those different regions as well.

Just the the growth piece on the in the in the class actions business, sort of what's what's going to drive the revenue growth this year?

Again, it's the the there's a there's a fair amount of WIP locked up that is not yet able to be recognized due to the accounting standards and whatever, the investigation WIP, there's a lot of that that should come out in FY '27, which we, funded matters that we can recognize the WIP and then start to be paid the the the fees for. There are still a lot of matters in in in class actions domestically in New Zealand and Thailand individually.

That's where the growth has come from. I think from the class action side of things, we have spent a lot of time in '26 working on some of these IMT matters and getting those worked up.

The class action team is looking at expanding resource-wise. We're looking at how best to go and attract talent in that team.

Once we get that in, obviously we can run more matters. It's that it's that balance of, Field of Dreams, if you build it, they will come.

We know that, we know we can grow it. We just need to go find the matters, which we've got, and then get them funded, and away we go.

Right. It sounds like you've you've you've already got a fair bit of of kind of revenue growth already baked in.

There's a there's a uh an amount in investigation WIP which, once we tick all the boxes to be able to recognize it from an accounting standard point of view, will will hit the P&L. Obviously, as we do that, we've got to go find more investigations and and work through the the pipeline.

I guess that's maybe a different way of saying it is, ideally, you want investigations to be run to then convert into matters, to go get funding, and then you're away. Run the matter, settle the matter, and just have that pipeline continually flowing.

I think we've made steps towards that in '26, and we'll continue to push that in '27. I think in '26, we also then focused on the IMT side and getting some of those matters ready to to run as well.

It was a really they've they've had a really good year, the class action team, in the work they've done. Unfortunately, the financials, with what's happened probably aren't completely reflective of that.

Again, I think it puts them in a really good position for '27 and beyond.

Okay. Thanks, Mark.

Then just the last one, just in terms of cash conversion just generally. If I look at your operating cash to EBITDA was sort of around 42%, 43%.

What what should we be thinking in terms of conversion for '27?

I can't give you a number, but improvement.

An improvement on that?

Yeah. In '26 there was, we did invest in emerging technologies.

We probably spent some money on on not a lot, but some money on emerging technologies, more so than we will in in other years because we're in that investigative phase. I think we've got got our plan now and know where we want to get to.

That should help. Also just the the conversion from what we've done, more efficient legal services, the legal work per fee earner increasing, getting more out of out of the cost base I guess as well.

It'll definitely improve as we move forward, yeah.

Great. Thanks very much.

Thanks, Peter.

Thank you, everyone. Much appreciated.

We will remain open to your your further queries. John George is on tap to talk to you as he usually does around this time, and we can answer those queries outside of that of this meeting.

We really thank you very much, and we'll be talking to you formally again at the half coming up. Thank you.

Thank you, all.