Ann: Notice of General Meeting/Proxy Form, page-110

No, they are not. I have read paras 69-74 several times.

What ASIC are alleging is that JK took extraordinary measures (using his position) to ensure ISX met the revenue milestone in the relevant period because he had something to gain. Stated differently, he used his position for personal gain.

The issue is you are 100% focusing on his reward; ASIC are 100% are focusing on his actions.

He got his reward because ISX's revenue milestone was met; that's the direct relationship. His reward doesn't have a direct relationship with the measures he took so it makes perfect sense to me if ASIC don't seem interested in blocking the demerger.

Also, should the court find him guilty, the appropriate punishments can still be meted out as long as ISX remains incorporated in Australia and he remains a director.