Ann: Notice of Extraordinary General Meeting/Proxy Form, page-29

Officially Arbiter were not part of the 2nd application (I assume that is the application you are actually referring to - the first was withdrawn after the company wasted everyone’s money and time by objecting on a technicality).

It is reasonably safe to assume that Arbiter voted in favour of Vitrinite at the S249F meeting and it must be reasonably likely that they will vote in favour again. It is not at all important that Arbiter are an official party to the new S249D application.