Rentokil Initial Pty Ltd v Kelly

Rentokil Initial Pty Ltd (ABN 98 000 034 597) Applicant Jesse James Kelly and others named in the schedule Respondents PENAL NOTICE - FREEZING ORDER

TO: Jesse James Kelly IF YOU (BEING THE PERSON BOUND BY THIS ORDER): (A) REFUSE OR NEGLECT TO DO ANY ACT WITHIN THE TIME SPECIFIED IN THIS ORDER FOR THE DOING OF THE ACT; OR (B) DISOBEY THE ORDER BY DOING AN ACT WHICH THE ORDER REQUIRES YOU NOT TO DO, YOU WILL BE LIABLE TO IMPRISONMENT, SEQUESTRATION OF PROPERTY OR OTHER PUNISHMENT. ANY OTHER PERSON WHO KNOWS OF THIS ORDER AND DOES ANYTHING WHICH HELPS OR PERMITS YOU TO BREACH THE TERMS OF THIS ORDER MAY BE SIMILARLY PUNISHED.

TO: Jesse James Kelly (FIRST RESPONDENT) This is a 'freezing order' made against you on 7 September 2021 by Justice Cheeseman at a hearing without notice to you after the Court was given the undertakings set out in Schedule A to this order and after the Court read the affidavit listed in Schedule B to this order. The Court orders: Introduction

1. (a) The application for this order is made returnable immediately. (b) The time for service of the application, supporting affidavits and originating process is abridged and service is to be effected by 5:00 PM on 9 September 2021.
2. Subject to the next paragraph, this order has effect up to and including 13 September 2021 (the Return Date). On the Return Date at 2:30 PM there will be a further hearing in respect of this order before the duty judge.
3. Anyone served with or notified of this order, including you, may apply to the Court at any time to vary or discharge this order or so much of it as affects the person served or notified.
4. In this order: (a) 'applicant', if there is more than one applicant, includes all the applicants; (b) 'you', where there is more than one of you, includes all of you and includes you if you are a corporation; (c) 'third party' means a person other than you and the applicant; (d) 'unencumbered value' means value free of mortgages, charges, liens or other encumbrances.
5. (a) If you are ordered to do something, you must do it by yourself or through directors, officers, partners, employees, agents or others acting on your behalf or on your instructions. (b) If you are ordered not to do something, you must not do it yourself or through directors, officers, partners, employees, agents or others acting on your behalf or on your instructions or with your encouragement or in any other way. Freezing of assets
6. (a) You must not remove from Australia or in any way dispose of, deal with or diminish the value of any of your assets in Australia ('Australian assets') up to the unencumbered value of AUD$3,269,793.78 ('the Relevant Amount'). (b) If the unencumbered value of your Australian assets exceeds the Relevant Amount, you may remove any of those assets from Australia or dispose of or deal with them or diminish their value, so long as the total unencumbered value of your Australian assets still exceeds the Relevant Amount.
7. For the purposes of this order, (a) your assets include: (i) all your assets, whether or not they are in your name and whether they are solely or co-owned; (ii) any asset which you have the power, directly or indirectly, to dispose of or deal with as if it were your own (you are to be regarded as having such power if a third party holds or controls the asset in accordance with your direct or indirect instructions); and (iii) the following assets in particular: A. the property known as 83 Quay CCT, Newport QLD 4020 or, if it has been sold, the net proceeds of the sale; B. your shares in the following corporations:

1. JJK Enterprises & Property Management Pty Ltd, carried on at Unit 4, 22-32 Robson Street, Clontarf QLD 4019;
2. JJK Property Investment & Wealth Management Pty Ltd, carried on at Unit 11, 2 Lakes Entrance Drive Springfield Lakes QLD 4300;
3. JJK Flock By The Bay Pty Ltd, carried on at Unit 4, 22-32 Robson Street, Clontarf QLD 4019;
4. JTM & JJK Wealth Management Pty Ltd, carried on at Unit 11, 2 Lakes Entrance Drive Springfield Lakes QLD 4300;
5. RHJK Holdings Pty Ltd, carried on at Unit 11, 2 Lakes Entrance Drive Springfield Lakes QLD 4300;
6. DKPKJKCK Wealth Management Pty Ltd, carried on at 20 Findlay Street Burpengary QLD 4505 or, if any or all of the assets have been sold, the net proceeds of the sale; and C. any money in the following bank accounts:
7. account number 421181081 in the name of Jesse James Kelly held with Australia & New Zealand Banking Group Limited ;
8. account number 421181145 in the name of Jesse Kelly held with Australia & New Zealand Banking Group Limited;
9. account number 10319303 in the name of Jesse Kelly held with the Commonwealth Bank of Australia; and
10. account number 10297007 in the name of JJ Kelly held with the Commonwealth Bank of Australia. (b) the value of your assets is the value of the interest you have individually in your assets. Provision of information

8. Subject to paragraph 9, you must: (a) by 5:00 PM on Wednesday 15 September, to the best of your ability inform the applicant in writing of all your assets in Australia, giving their value, location and details (including any mortgages, charges or other encumbrances to which they are subject) and the extent of your interest in the assets; and (b) by 5:00 PM on Wednesday 15 September 2021, swear and serve on the applicant an affidavit setting out the above information.
9. (a) This paragraph (9) applies if you are not a corporation and you wish to object to complying with paragraph 8 on the grounds that some or all of the information required to be disclosed may tend to prove that you: (i) have committed an offence against or arising under an Australian law or a law of a foreign country; or (ii) are liable to a civil penalty. (b) This paragraph (9) also applies if you are a corporation and all of the persons who are able to comply with paragraph 8 on your behalf and with whom you have been able to communicate, wish to object to your complying with paragraph 8 on the grounds that some or all of the information required to be disclosed may tend to prove that they respectively: (i) have committed an offence against or arising under an Australian law or a law of a foreign country; or (ii) are liable to a civil penalty. (c) You must: (i) disclose so much of the information required to be disclosed to which no objection is taken; and (ii) prepare an affidavit containing so much of the information required to be disclosed to which objection is taken, and deliver it to the Court in a sealed envelope; and (iii) file and serve on each other party a separate affidavit setting out the basis of the objection. Exceptions to this order
10. This order does not prohibit you from: (a) paying up to $500 a day on your ordinary living expenses; (b) paying $20,000 on your reasonable legal expenses; (c) dealing with or disposing of any of your assets in the ordinary and proper course of your business, including paying business expenses bona fide and properly incurred; and (d) in relation to matters not falling within (a), (b) or (c), dealing with or disposing of any of your assets in discharging obligations bona fide and properly incurred under a contract entered into before this order was made, provided that before doing so you give the applicant, if possible, at least two working days written notice of the particulars of the obligation.
11. You and the applicant may agree in writing that the exceptions in the preceding paragraph are to be varied. In that case the applicant or you must as soon as practicable file with the Court and serve on the other a minute of a proposed consent order recording the variation signed by or on behalf of the applicant and you, and the Court may order that the exceptions are varied accordingly. Any communications to the Court should be copied to the applicant's lawyers identified in Schedule B.
12. (a) This order will cease to have effect if you: (i) pay the sum of $3,269,793.78 into Court; or (ii) pay that sum into a joint bank account in the name of your lawyer and the lawyer for the applicant as agreed in writing between them; or (iii) provide security in that sum by a method agreed in writing with the applicant to be held subject to the order of the Court. (b) Any such payment and any such security will not provide the applicant with any priority over your other creditors in the event of your insolvency. (c) If this order ceases to have effect pursuant 12(a) above, you must as soon as practicable file with the Court and serve on the applicant notice of that fact. Costs

Rentokil Initial Pty Ltd (ABN 98 000 034 597) Applicant Jesse James Kelly and others named in the schedule Respondents PENAL NOTICE - FREEZING ORDER TO: JJK Enterprises & Property Management Pty Ltd ACN 639 764 346 IF YOU (BEING THE PERSON BOUND BY THIS ORDER): (A) REFUSE OR NEGLECT TO DO ANY ACT WITHIN THE TIME SPECIFIED IN THIS ORDER FOR THE DOING OF THE ACT; OR (B) DISOBEY THE ORDER BY DOING AN ACT WHICH THE ORDER REQUIRES YOU NOT TO DO, YOU WILL BE LIABLE TO IMPRISONMENT, SEQUESTRATION OF PROPERTY OR OTHER PUNISHMENT. ANY OTHER PERSON WHO KNOWS OF THIS ORDER AND DOES ANYTHING WHICH HELPS OR PERMITS YOU TO BREACH THE TERMS OF THIS ORDER MAY BE SIMILARLY PUNISHED.

TO: JJK Enterprises & Property Management Pty Ltd ACN 639 764 346 (SECOND RESPONDENT) This is a 'freezing order' made against you on 7 September 2021 by Justice Cheeseman at a hearing without notice to you after the Court was given the undertakings set out in Schedule A to this order and after the Court read the affidavits listed in Schedule B to this order. The Court orders: Introduction

1. (a) The application for this order is made returnable immediately. (b) The time for service of the application, supporting affidavits and originating process is abridged and service is to be effected by 5:00 PM on 9 September 2021.
2. Subject to the next paragraph, this order has effect up to and including 13 September 2021 (the Return Date). On the Return Date at 2:30 PM there will be a further hearing in respect of this order before the duty judge.
3. Anyone served with or notified of this order, including you, may apply to the Court at any time to vary or discharge this order or so much of it as affects the person served or notified.
4. In this order: (a) 'applicant', if there is more than one applicant, includes all the applicants; (b) 'you', where there is more than one of you, includes all of you and includes you if you are a corporation; (c) 'third party' means a person other than you and the applicant; (d) 'unencumbered value' means value free of mortgages, charges, liens or other encumbrances.
5. (a) If you are ordered to do something, you must do it by yourself or through directors, officers, partners, employees, agents or others acting on your behalf or on your instructions. (b) If you are ordered not to do something, you must not do it yourself or through directors, officers, partners, employees, agents or others acting on your behalf or on your instructions or with your encouragement or in any other way. Freezing of assets
6. (a) You must not remove from Australia or in any way dispose of, deal with or diminish the value of any of your assets in Australia ('Australian assets') up to the unencumbered value of AUD$1,715,117.03 ('the Relevant Amount'). (b) If the unencumbered value of your Australian assets exceeds the Relevant Amount, you may remove any of those assets from Australia or dispose of or deal with them or diminish their value, so long as the total unencumbered value of your Australian assets still exceeds the Relevant Amount.
7. For the purposes of this order, (a) your assets include: (i) all your assets, whether or not they are in your name and whether they are solely or co-owned; (ii) any asset which you have the power, directly or indirectly, to dispose of or deal with as if it were your own (you are to be regarded as having such power if a third party holds or controls the asset in accordance with your direct or indirect instructions); and (iii) the following assets in particular: A. the property known as 8 Tubbs St, Clontarf QLD 4019 or, if it has been sold, the net proceeds of the sale; B. the property known as Unit 4, 22-32 Robson St, Clontarf QLD 4019 or, if it has been sold, the net proceeds of the sale; C. the motor vehicle described as a 2019 Mercedes-Benz A250 Hatchback bearing the registration number 095JTM and VIN WDD1770472N115691; D. the motor vehicle described as a 2020 Hyundai Tucson Wagon bearing the registration number 749AQ8 and VIN KMHJ2814MMU331984; E. the motor vehicle described as a 2020 Mercedes-Benz G63 AMG Wagon bearing the registration number GWAGGN and VIN W1N4632762X370477; and (iv) the assets of your businesses associated with you: A. JKS BOAT CHARTERS, B. JKS AUTO DETAILING, C. JKS CAR DETAILING, D. JKS DETAILING, E. FLOCKY BY THE BAY, F. JKS AUTO GROUP, G. JK'S AUTOCARE, H. JK'S EUROPEAN AUTOCARE SPECIALIST, I. FLOCK EATERY, J. ADVANCED ADVANTAGE TRAINING ACADEMY, K. CONSULTING WITH JOEL, L. HERBERT'S HOT FOOD, M. JKS HOT FOOD, N. JKS HOT FOOD TRUCKS, O. JKS SWIM SCHOOL, P. JK'S COMMUNITY SERVICE CONSULTING, Q. JK'S SUPPLY CHAIN CONSULTING, R. JK'S FISH & CHIPPY, S. JK'S HOUSING INVESTMENTS, carried on at Unit 4, 22-32 Robson St, Clontarf QLD 4019 or, if any or all of the assets have been sold, the net proceeds of the sale; (v) any money in the following bank accounts: A. account number 319587026 in the name of JJK ENTERPRISES & PROPERTY MGMT P/L T/AS JK'S FISH & CHIPPY held with Australia & New Zealand Banking Group Limited; and B. account number 39871184 in the name of JJK Enterprises & Property Management held with Commonwealth Bank of Australia. (b) the value of your assets is the value of the interest you have individually in your assets. Provision of information
8. Subject to paragraph 9, you must: (a) by 5:00 PM on Wednesday 15 September 2021, to the best of your ability inform the applicant in writing of all your assets in Australia, giving their value, location and details (including any mortgages, charges or other encumbrances to which they are subject) and the extent of your interest in the assets; and (b) by 5:00 PM on Wednesday 15 September 2021, swear and serve on the applicant an affidavit setting out the above information.
9. (a) This paragraph (9) applies if you are not a corporation and you wish to object to complying with paragraph 8 on the grounds that some or all of the information required to be disclosed may tend to prove that you: (i) have committed an offence against or arising under an Australian law or a law of a foreign country; or (ii) are liable to a civil penalty. (b) This paragraph (9) also applies if you are a corporation and all of the persons who are able to comply with paragraph 8 on your behalf and with whom you have been able to communicate, wish to object to your complying with paragraph 8 on the grounds that some or all of the information required to be disclosed may tend to prove that they respectively: (i) have committed an offence against or arising under an Australian law or a law of a foreign country; or (ii) are liable to a civil penalty. (c) You must: (i) disclose so much of the information required to be disclosed to which no objection is taken; and (ii) prepare an affidavit containing so much of the information required to be disclosed to which objection is taken, and deliver it to the Court in a sealed envelope; and (iii) file and serve on each other party a separate affidavit setting out the basis of the objection. Exceptions to this order
10. This order does not prohibit you from: (a) paying $5,000 on your reasonable legal expenses; (b) dealing with or disposing of any of your assets in the ordinary and proper course of your business, including paying business expenses bona fide and properly incurred; and (c) in relation to matters not falling within (a), (b) or (c), dealing with or disposing of any of your assets in discharging obligations bona fide and properly incurred under a contract entered into before this order was made, provided that before doing so you give the applicant, if possible, at least two working days written notice of the particulars of the obligation.
11. You and the applicant may agree in writing that the exceptions in the preceding paragraph are to be varied. In that case the applicant or you must as soon as practicable file with the Court and serve on the other a minute of a proposed consent order recording the variation signed by or on behalf of the applicant and you, and the Court may order that the exceptions are varied accordingly. Any communications to the Court should be copied to the applicant's lawyers identified in Schedule B.
12. (a) This order will cease to have effect if you: (i) pay the sum of $1,715,117.03 into Court; or (ii) pay that sum into a joint bank account in the name of your lawyer and the lawyer for the applicant as agreed in writing between them; or (iii) provide security in that sum by a method agreed in writing with the applicant to be held subject to the order of the Court. (b) Any such payment and any such security will not provide the applicant with any priority over your other creditors in the event of your insolvency. (c) If this order ceases to have effect pursuant 12(a) above, you must as soon as practicable file with the Court and serve on the applicant notice of that fact. Costs
13. The costs of this application are reserved to the Court hearing the application on the Return Date. Persons other than the applicant and second respondent
14. Set off by banks This order does not prevent any bank from exercising any right of set off it has in respect of any facility which it gave you before it was notified of this order.
15. Bank withdrawals by the second respondent No bank need inquire as to the application or proposed application of any money withdrawn by you if the withdrawal appears to be permitted by this order. SCHEDULE A UNDERTAKINGS GIVEN TO THIS COURT BY THE APPLICANT
16. The applicant undertakes to submit to such order (if any) as the Court may consider to be just for the payment of compensation (to be assessed by the Court or as it may direct) to any person (whether or not a party) affected by the operation of the order.
17. As soon as practicable, the applicant will file and serve upon the respondent copies of: (a) this order; (b) the application for this order for hearing on the return date; (c) the following material in so far as it was relied on by the applicant at the hearing when the order was made: (i) affidavits (or draft affidavits); (ii) exhibits capable of being copied; (iii) any written submission; and (iv) any other document that was provided to the Court. (d) a transcript, or, if none is available, a note, of any exclusively oral allegation of fact that was made and of any exclusively oral submission that was put, to the Court; (e) the originating process, or, if none was filed, any draft originating process produced to the Court.
18. As soon as practicable, the applicant will cause anyone notified of this order to be given a copy of it.
19. The applicant will pay the reasonable costs of anyone other than the respondent which have been incurred as a result of this order, including the costs of finding out whether that person holds any of the respondent's assets.
20. If this order ceases to have effect the applicant will promptly take all reasonable steps to inform in writing anyone to who has been notified of this order, or who he has reasonable grounds for supposing may act upon this order, that it has ceased to have effect.
21. The applicant will not, without leave of the Court, use any information obtained as a result of this order for the purpose of any civil or criminal proceedings, either in or outside Australia, other than this proceeding.
22. The applicant will not, without leave of the Court, seek to enforce this order in any country outside Australia or seek in any country outside Australia an order of a similar nature or an order conferring a charge or other security against the respondent or the respondent's assets. SCHEDULE B AFFIDAVITS RELIED ON Name of deponent Date affidavit made (1) David Peter Hames 7 September 2021 NAME AND ADDRESS OF APPLICANT'S LAWYERS The Applicant's lawyers are: Clayton Utz Level 15, 1 Bligh Street Sydney NSW 2000 Attention: Jonathan Slater / Ananya Roy jslater@claytonutz.com / aroy@claytonutz.com 612 9353 5314 Annexure C Rule 39.33 Freezing order (made without notice) Federal Court of Australia No. NSD 923 of 2021 District Registry: New South Wales Division: Commercial and Corporations

Rentokil Initial Pty Ltd (ABN 98 000 034 597) Applicant Jesse James Kelly and others named in the schedule Respondents PENAL NOTICE - FREEZING ORDER TO: JJK Property Investment & Wealth Management Pty Ltd ACN 640 114 094 IF YOU (BEING THE PERSON BOUND BY THIS ORDER): (A) REFUSE OR NEGLECT TO DO ANY ACT WITHIN THE TIME SPECIFIED IN THIS ORDER FOR THE DOING OF THE ACT; OR (B) DISOBEY THE ORDER BY DOING AN ACT WHICH THE ORDER REQUIRES YOU NOT TO DO, YOU WILL BE LIABLE TO IMPRISONMENT, SEQUESTRATION OF PROPERTY OR OTHER PUNISHMENT. ANY OTHER PERSON WHO KNOWS OF THIS ORDER AND DOES ANYTHING WHICH HELPS OR PERMITS YOU TO BREACH THE TERMS OF THIS ORDER MAY BE SIMILARLY PUNISHED.

TO: JJK Property Investment & Wealth Management Pty Ltd ACN 640 114 094 (THIRD RESPONDENT) This is a 'freezing order' made against you on 7 September 2021 by Justice Cheeseman at a hearing without notice to you after the Court was given the undertakings set out in Schedule A to this order and after the Court read the affidavits listed in Schedule B to this order. The Court orders: Introduction

1. (a) The application for this order is made returnable immediately. (b) The time for service of the application, supporting affidavits and originating process is abridged and service is to be effected by 5:00 PM on 9 September 2021.
2. Subject to the next paragraph, this order has effect up to and including 13 September 2021 (the Return Date). On the Return Date at 2:30 PM there will be a further hearing in respect of this order before the duty judge.
3. Anyone served with or notified of this order, including you, may apply to the Court at any time to vary or discharge this order or so much of it as affects the person served or notified.
4. In this order: (a) 'applicant', if there is more than one applicant, includes all the applicants; (b) 'you', where there is more than one of you, includes all of you and includes you if you are a corporation; (c) 'third party' means a person other than you and the applicant; (d) 'unencumbered value' means value free of mortgages, charges, liens or other encumbrances.
5. (a) If you are ordered to do something, you must do it by yourself or through directors, officers, partners, employees, agents or others acting on your behalf or on your instructions. (b) If you are ordered not to do something, you must not do it yourself or through directors, officers, partners, employees, agents or others acting on your behalf or on your instructions or with your encouragement or in any other way. Freezing of assets
6. (a) You must not remove from Australia or in any way dispose of, deal with or diminish the value of any of your assets in Australia ('Australian assets') up to the unencumbered value of AUD$3,269,793.78 ('the Relevant Amount'). (b) If the unencumbered value of your Australian assets exceeds the Relevant Amount, you may remove any of those assets from Australia or dispose of or deal with them or diminish their value, so long as the total unencumbered value of your Australian assets still exceeds the Relevant Amount.
7. For the purposes of this order, (a) your assets include: (i) all your assets, whether or not they are in your name and whether they are solely or co-owned; (ii) any asset which you have the power, directly or indirectly, to dispose of or deal with as if it were your own (you are to be regarded as having such power if a third party holds or controls the asset in accordance with your direct or indirect instructions); and (iii) the following assets in particular: A. the property known as 13 Etty St, Dalby QLD 4405 or, if it has been sold, the net proceeds of the sale; B. the property known as Unit 39, 6 Sullivan St, Emerald QLD 4720 or, if it has been sold, the net proceeds of the sale; C. the property known as Unit 45, 6 Sullivan St, Emerald QLD 4720 or, if it has been sold, the net proceeds of the sale; and (c) the value of your assets is the value of the interest you have individually in your assets. Provision of information
8. Subject to paragraph 9, you must: (a) by 5:00 PM on Wednesday 15 September 2021, to the best of your ability inform the applicant in writing of all your assets in Australia, giving their value, location and details (including any mortgages, charges or other encumbrances to which they are subject) and the extent of your interest in the assets; and (b) by 5:00 PM on Wednesday 15 September 2021, swear and serve on the applicant an affidavit setting out the above information.
9. (a) This paragraph (9) applies if you are not a corporation and you wish to object to complying with paragraph 8 on the grounds that some or all of the information required to be disclosed may tend to prove that you: (i) have committed an offence against or arising under an Australian law or a law of a foreign country; or (ii) are liable to a civil penalty. (b) This paragraph (9) also applies if you are a corporation and all of the persons who are able to comply with paragraph 8 on your behalf and with whom you have been able to communicate, wish to object to your complying with paragraph 8 on the grounds that some or all of the information required to be disclosed may tend to prove that they respectively: (i) have committed an offence against or arising under an Australian law or a law of a foreign country; or (ii) are liable to a civil penalty. (c) You must: (i) disclose so much of the information required to be disclosed to which no objection is taken; and (ii) prepare an affidavit containing so much of the information required to be disclosed to which objection is taken, and deliver it to the Court in a sealed envelope; and (iii) file and serve on each other party a separate affidavit setting out the basis of the objection. Exceptions to this order
10. This order does not prohibit you from: (a) paying $5,000 on your reasonable legal expenses; (b) dealing with or disposing of any of your assets in the ordinary and proper course of your business, including paying business expenses bona fide and properly incurred; and (c) in relation to matters not falling within (a), (b) or (c), dealing with or disposing of any of your assets in discharging obligations bona fide and properly incurred under a contract entered into before this order was made, provided that before doing so you give the applicant, if possible, at least two working days written notice of the particulars of the obligation.
11. You and the applicant may agree in writing that the exceptions in the preceding paragraph are to be varied. In that case the applicant or you must as soon as practicable file with the Court and serve on the other a minute of a proposed consent order recording the variation signed by or on behalf of the applicant and you, and the Court may order that the exceptions are varied accordingly. Any communications to the Court should be copied to the applicant's lawyers identified in Schedule B.
12. (a) This order will cease to have effect if you: (i) pay the sum of $3,269,793.78 into Court; or (ii) pay that sum into a joint bank account in the name of your lawyer and the lawyer for the applicant as agreed in writing between them; or (iii) provide security in that sum by a method agreed in writing with the applicant to be held subject to the order of the Court. (b) Any such payment and any such security will not provide the applicant with any priority over your other creditors in the event of your insolvency. (c) If this order ceases to have effect pursuant 12(a) above, you must as soon as practicable file with the Court and serve on the applicant notice of that fact. Costs
13. The costs of this application are reserved to the Court hearing the application on the Return Date. Persons other than the applicant and third respondent
14. Set off by banks This order does not prevent any bank from exercising any right of set off it has in respect of any facility which it gave you before it was notified of this order.
15. Bank withdrawals by the third respondent No bank need inquire as to the application or proposed application of any money withdrawn by you if the withdrawal appears to be permitted by this order. SCHEDULE A UNDERTAKINGS GIVEN TO THE COURT BY THE APPLICANT
16. The applicant undertakes to submit to such order (if any) as the Court may consider to be just for the payment of compensation (to be assessed by the Court or as it may direct) to any person (whether or not a party) affected by the operation of the order.
17. As soon as practicable, the applicant will file and serve upon the respondent copies of: (a) this order; (b) the application for this order for hearing on the return date; (c) the following material in so far as it was relied on by the applicant at the hearing when the order was made: (i) affidavits (or draft affidavits); (ii) exhibits capable of being copied; (iii) any written submission; and (iv) any other document that was provided to the Court. (d) a transcript, or, if none is available, a note, of any exclusively oral allegation of fact that was made and of any exclusively oral submission that was put, to the Court; (e) the originating process, or, if none was filed, any draft originating process produced to the Court.
18. As soon as practicable, the applicant will cause anyone notified of this order to be given a copy of it.
19. The applicant will pay the reasonable costs of anyone other than the respondent which have been incurred as a result of this order, including the costs of finding out whether that person holds any of the respondent's assets.
20. If this order ceases to have effect the applicant will promptly take all reasonable steps to inform in writing anyone to who has been notified of this order, or who he has reasonable grounds for supposing may act upon this order, that it has ceased to have effect.
21. The applicant will not, without leave of the Court, use any information obtained as a result of this order for the purpose of any civil or criminal proceedings, either in or outside Australia, other than this proceeding.
22. The applicant will not, without leave of the Court, seek to enforce this order in any country outside Australia or seek in any country outside Australia an order of a similar nature or an order conferring a charge or other security against the respondent or the respondent's assets. Schedule B AFFIDAVITS RELIED ON Name of deponent Date affidavit made (1) David Peter Hames 7 September 2021 NAME AND ADDRESS OF APPLICANT'S LAWYERS The Applicant's lawyers are: Clayton Utz Level 15, 1 Bligh Street Sydney NSW 2000 Attention: Jonathan Slater / Ananya Roy jslater@claytonutz.com / aroy@claytonutz.com 612 9353 5314

OVERVIEW 1 By originating application dated 7 September 2021, the applicant, Rentokil Initial Pty Ltd sought ex parte relief for freezing orders and ancillary orders against the respondents arising out of an alleged invoice fraud. Rentokil alleges it paid a total of approximately $3.2 million on falsified invoices. I made orders against each of the respondents substantially in the form sought by Rentokil, save that I declined to make certain ancillary orders on an ex parte basis which were additional to asset disclosure orders in the usual form. Rentokil may, if it chooses to do so, press for that relief to be heard after the respondents have been served. These are my reasons for making the orders on the ex parte application. 2 The first respondent, Jesse James Kelly, was employed by Rentokil between 3 April 2017 and 10 August 2021. Mr Kelly is the sole director and shareholder of the second respondent, JJK Enterprises & Property Management Pty Ltd and of the third respondent, JJK Property Investments & Wealth Management Pty Ltd. 3 Rentokil's application for freezing orders and ancillary orders relied on rules 7.32, 7.33 and 7.35 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth). The application was supported by an affidavit of David Peter Hames, the Chief Financial Officer of Rentokil's Pacific business unit and was returnable before me as Duty Judge.

PRINCIPLES 4 The Court has power to make a freezing order generally under s 23 of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) and Division 7.4 of the Rules. The purpose of a freezing order is to prevent the frustration or inhibition of the Court's process by seeking to meet a danger that a judgment or prospective judgment of the Court will be wholly or partly unsatisfied: r 7.32; see also r 7.35(4). The Court may make an order ancillary to a freezing order or a prospective freezing order, including an order made for the purpose of eliciting information relating to assets relevant to the freezing order or prospective freezing order: r 7.33. 5 The principles governing the grant of freezing orders are well-established. Rentokil must show that: (a) it has a good arguable case; (b) there is a danger that the prospective judgment will be wholly or partly unsatisfied because the assets of the prospective judgment debtor will be disposed of, dealt with or diminished in value; and (c) the balance of convenience favours granting the order. 6 The applicable principles were summarised in Basi v Namitha Nakul Pty Ltd [2019] FCA 743 (Wigney J) at [7] - [9]: 7 The purpose of a freezing order is to prevent an abuse or a frustration of the Court's process by depriving an applicant of the fruits of any judgment obtained in the action: Jackson v Sterling Industries Ltd [1987] HCA 23; (1987) 162 CLR 612 at 625. It is "no light matter" to freeze a party's assets and there is, accordingly, a need for the Court to exercise caution: Patterson v BTR Engineering (Aust) Ltd (1989) 18 NSWLR 319 at 324F. A freezing order is a "drastic remedy" which should not be lightly granted: Cardile v LED Builders Pty Ltd (1999) 198 CLR 380 at [51] citing Frigo v Culhari (unreported, NSW Court of Appeal 17 July 1998 at 10-11). 8 An applicant has a good arguable case if they have "a reasonably arguable case on legal as well as factual matters": Cardile at [68]; Insolvency Guardian Melbourne Pty Ltd v Carlei (2016) 111 ACSR 236; [2016] FCA 72 at [18]. It has also been said that a "good arguable case" is one "which is more than barely capable of serious argument, and yet not necessarily one the judge considers would have better than a fifty per cent chance of success": Curtis v NID Pty Ltd [2010] FCA 1072 at [6] citing Ninemia Maritime Corp v Trave Schiffahrtsgesselschaft mbH & Co KG (The Niedersachsen) [1983] Com LR 234 at 235 (affirmed on appeal: [1983] 1 WLR 1412); Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Greenfield Electrical Services Pty Ltd (2016) 103 ATR 327; [2016] FCA 653 at [7]. 9 Where a freezing order is sought on the basis of a danger of the dissipation of assets, it is not necessary for the Court to be satisfied that the risk of dissipation is more probable than not. Nor is it necessary for the applicant to adduce evidence of an intention on the part of the respondent to dissipate assets: Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Hua Wang Bank Berhad (2010) 273 ALR 194; [2010] FCA 1014 at [8]-[10]; Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Chemical Trustee Ltd (No 4) (2012) 90 ATR 711; [2012] FCA 1064 at [23]. The making of a freezing order involves a discretionary exercise of power. The Court retains a discretion to refuse relief even if the requirements in r 7.35 of the Rules are satisfied: Patterson at 321-322.

Good arguable case 7 Before a freezing order is made, Rentokil must show that there is a good arguable case on legal and factual matters or a sufficiently realistic prospect of success on the proceedings: Cardile v LED Builders Pty Ltd [1999] HCA 18; (1999) 198 CLR 380 at 408 [68] (Gaudron, McHugh, Gummow, Kirby and Callinan JJ); Re Donnelly; Hancock v Porteous [2001] FCA 345 at [9] (Stone J). In the context of r 7.35, Rentokil must establish that it has a good arguable case on a justiciable cause of action. The criterion of good arguable case is a lesser standard than the prima facie cause of action requirement favoured by the majority in Patterson v BTR Engineering (1989) 18 NSWLR 319 (Gleeson CJ and Rogers A-JA). 8 The evidence of Mr Hames on the application established the following at a prima facie level. 9 Rentokil is one of Australia's largest suppliers of pest control services, hygiene products and indoor plant servicing to commercial and household customers. It has offices in each state in Australia. Its national headquarters are located in Lidcombe, New South Wales. The business employs approximately 1,600 workers Australia-wide. 10 In addition to its Australian operations, Rentokil also has offices in New Zealand and Fiji, which are ultimately owned by Rentokil's parent company, Rentokil Initial 1927 Plc. 11 The ex parte application for urgent interlocutory relief arises out of the discovery by Rentokil of false invoices in the period 31 March 2020 and 15 July 2021 in the names of third-party suppliers, which Mr Kelly appears to have created using his work laptop computer and/or entered into Rentokil's accounting software. The invoices in issue directed that payment be made to one of two ANZ bank accounts or a CBA account. Rentokil subsequently discovered that the ANZ accounts into which payments were made are held by Mr Kelly or JJK Enterprises. The identity of the holder of the CBA account is presently unknown. 12 Mr Kelly commenced his employment with Rentokil in April 2017 in the position of Operational Implementation Manager. In around March 2019, he was promoted to National Service Support and Supply Chain Manager. He worked in that position until October 2020, when he became the Head of Operational Support and Supply Chain for the Pacific division. Mr Kelly's primary areas of responsibility involved managing Rentokil's Australian and Pacific supply chain and warehousing operations. He was also responsible for the provision of support and training in relation to Rentokil's invoicing, inventory and supply chain software, known as Navision. 13 Rentokil's discovery of the alleged fraud followed an investigation in early August 2021 into an invoice purporting to be from a supplier named Avetta, in respect of which Mr Kelly had submitted a payment request to Rentokil's accounts division. After a series of investigative steps, the details of which are not necessary to recount, Mr Kelly admitted to having created the false invoice and tendered his resignation. In his letter of resignation of 10 August 2021, Mr Kelly said: I was responsible for creating the invoice payable to Avetta for the amount of $73,480.00, dated 2 August 2021. I created this invoice on that day using a previous Avetta invoice as a template, substituting my bank account details for Avetta's. I then lodged the invoice by way of sending it to Kyle Ingleton at Rentokil-Initial for approval and payment. This invoice was prepared on the basis of works completed for Rentokil-Initial although no such work was undertaken. … I regret the conduct disclosed above and as a result I tender my resignation as Head of Operational Support Services and Supply Chain for the Pacific region. My resignation will be effective at close of business on 10 August 2021. 14 Mr Kelly is alleged to have again admitted to fabricating the Avetta invoice in a discussion with his supervisor, in which he said that he had suffered from a "moment of madness". 15 Following the discovery of the Avetta invoice, Rentokil engaged forensic investigators to examine Mr Kelly's work-related email accounts and his work-issued laptop computer and mobile telephone and to compare the results with information stored in Navision. 16 The investigators found copies of invoices in the name of Macrosphere Pty Ltd and eight invoices in the name of E&M Metal Fabrication & Powder Coating Pty Ltd on the hard drive of Mr Kelly's Rentokil laptop. The metadata for many of the files identified Mr Kelly as the author of the document. The investigators concluded that Mr Kelly had most likely created the 32 false invoices using the Rentokil laptop. 17 The Macrosphere invoices located on Mr Kelly's laptop contained the BSB and account numbers of two ANZ bank accounts. Copies of account statements for the ANZ accounts were also found on the same computer. As noted at [10], the statements indicate that one of the accounts is held by Mr Kelly and the other is held by JJK Enterprises. 18 By entering the ANZ account numbers into Navision, the investigators located further Macrosphere invoices, which used the same ANZ account numbers as part of the payment details. The additional invoices are likely to have also been created by Mr Kelly or at his direction. 19 Also located within Navision records were more than 2,500 items of stock that were described as purchased from Macrosphere. Those items have not been located in Rentokil's warehouse and storage facilities. It appears that Mr Kelly entered, or caused to be entered, false information into Navision regarding the provision of stock. 20 Between 31 March 2020 and 15 July 2021, Rentokil transferred a total of $1,901,252.98 to the ANZ accounts held by Mr Kelly and JJK Enterprises in payment of Macrosphere invoices. Of this total, $1,715,117.03 went to JJK Enterprises with the balance going to Mr Kelly. 21 Rentokil attempted to verify the authenticity of the Macrosphere invoices but the information supplied by Macrosphere was contradictory and did not dispel Rentokil's concerns that the invoices were falsified and that the payments went to accounts controlled by Mr Kelly and JJK Enterprises. Rentokil was initially told that Macrosphere had invoiced Rentokil for $850.27 but was eventually informed that between 30 November 2020 and 15 July 2021, Rentokil had paid to Macrosphere a total of $1,697,895.99. Rentokil's enquiries regarding the authenticity of the Macrosphere invoices and the account numbers stated on those invoices were otherwise left unanswered. 22 E&M is a third-party supplier with whom Rentokil contracted in around February 2020 to purchase parts for hand sanitiser dispensers. On 13 July 2021, an employee within Rentokil's accounts payable team received an alert that an email containing a remittance advice to E&M could not be delivered. Subsequent interaction between Rentokil and E&M revealed that the ABN, email address and the CBA bank account in the payment details on the invoice did not match those of E&M. This issue was reported to Mr Kelly and others within Rentokil. In response, Mr Kelly repeatedly reported that he had been advised by the owner of E&M that the owner had changed his email address and bank account details due to an ongoing divorce. At that time, Mr Kelly's colleagues had no reason to doubt the explanation proffered by Mr Kelly. 23 The discovery of the falsified Avetta invoice in early August 2021 caused Rentokil to revisit the issue in respect of the earlier E&M invoice. Subsequent investigations revealed that on or about 16 November 2020, the account details associated with E&M in Navision had been changed to the CBA account that was used in the suspect E&M invoice. In the period following the change of account number, Rentokil paid amounts totalling $1,368,540.80 to the CBA account. E&M subsequently informed Rentokil that it did not bank with the CBA and had never used any account other than the Bank of Queensland account to conduct its business with Rentokil. 24 The forensic investigators appointed by Rentokil cross-checked the CBA account number against the Navision records and identified further E&M invoices which appear to have been fabricated by Mr Kelly, in addition to those that had been found on Mr Kelly's laptop computer. Rentokil's investigations to date have not identified the holder of the CBA account to which it transferred payment on the purported E&M invoices. 25 Rentokil has not located the approximately 6,200 items of stock that are recorded in Navision as purchased from E&M. It appears on the evidence as it stands that Mr Kelly entered, or caused to be entered, false information into Navision in relation to those items. 26 It is not necessary to set out the details of Rentokil's investigation into the property of the respondents, those details are reflected in the terms of the orders as made and were supported by Mr Hame's affidavit. I note that during the period from which the false invoices date, Mr Kelly and companies controlled by him or in which he has an interest acquired various real properties. 27 Mr Kelly jointly owns real property located in Newport, Queensland, which was purchased in October 2020. He also has a number of bank accounts in his name, including the ANZ account referred to in paragraph 16 above. 28 JJK Enterprises is the registered proprietor of two properties in Clontarf, Queensland, both of which were purchased in October 2020. It also owns three motor vehicles. 29 JJK Property is the registered proprietor of three properties in the suburbs of Dalby and Emerald, Queensland, which were purchased in May 2020 and June 2020 and are each subject to a CBA mortgage. The acquisition of these properties by JJK Property occurred shortly after the earliest of the suspect invoices which Rentokil has identified. As noted above, JJK Property is controlled by Mr Kelly. There is no evidence of direct payments from Rentokil to JJK Property. The evidence does not reveal any details in respect of JJK Property's bank account(s) - other than it has mortgages with the CBA. The holder of the CBA account which received payments made by reference to some of the suspect E&M invoices has not been identified. The evidence against Mr Kelly is strong and includes an admission in respect of the Avetta invoice which was the first of the falsified invoices to be discovered. In these circumstances, notwithstanding the absence of evidence of direct payment to JJK Property, I am satisfied that Rentokil has established a case against JJK Property to the requisite standard. 30 Rentokil's claims are framed as follows: (a) Against Mr Kelly - breach of employment contract; breach of fiduciary duty; breach of s 182 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth); misleading and deceptive conduct under the Australian Consumer Law; tort (deceit and conspiracy); and restitution; (b) Against JJK Enterprises: tort (deceit and conspiracy), involvement in Mr Kelly's breach of s182 of the Corporations Act, misleading and deceptive conduct under the Australian Consumer Law; knowing assistance in Mr Kelly's breach of fiduciary duty; and restitution. (c) Against JJK Property: tort (deceit and conspiracy), involvement in Mr Kelly's breach of s182 of the Corporations Act; knowing assistance in Mr Kelly's breach of fiduciary duty; and restitution. 31 I am satisfied that Rentokil has demonstrated for the purpose of this application that it has, at least, a good arguable case against each of the respondents.

Reasonable apprehension that assets will be dissipated 32 Rentokil must also show that, unless the order is granted, there is a reasonable apprehension that assets will be dissipated so as to frustrate the action or execution: Cardile at [26], [41]-[42] (Gaudron, McHugh, Gummow and Callinan JJ). It is not essential for an applicant for freezing orders to demonstrate a positive intention on the part of the respondent to frustrate a judgment: National Australia Bank Ltd v Bond Brewing Holdings Limited [1990] HCA 10; (1990) 169 CLR 271 at 277 (Mason CJ, Brennan and Deane JJ); Cardile at [26]. Nor is it necessary for Rentokil to demonstrate that the risk of dissipation is more probable than not: Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Hua Wang Bank Berhad [2010] FCA 1014; (2010) 273 ALR 194 at 196 - 197 [8] - [10] (Kenny J); Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Chemical Trustee Ltd (No 4) [2012] FCA 1064; (2012) 90 ATR 711 at 717 [23] (Perram J). It is enough that Rentokil establishes that, in the absence of relief, there is a danger or real risk that the assets will be dealt with in a way which would prevent Rentokil from recovering judgment: Ninemia Maritime Corporation v Trave Schiffahrtsgesellschaft mbH UND CO KG [1983] 1 WLR 1412 at 1422; Beach Petroleum NL v Johnson (1992) 9 ACSR 404 at 405 - 406 (Von Doussa J). 33 Allegations of fraud will commonly provide a basis for a sufficient concern that assets are in jeopardy to warrant the granting of a freezing order: Patterson at 325 - 327; RRG Nominees Pty Ltd v Visible Temporary Fencing Australia Pty Ltd [2017] FCA 1352 at [12] (White J). As noted by Anderson J in Spotlight Pty Ltd v Mehta [2019] FCA 1796 (at [23]), "[w]here, as here, allegations made against the respondents contain allegations of serious dishonesty, evidence of that nature is capable of satisfying the Court of the existence of the requisite danger to dispose of, deal with or dissipate assets". 34 Rentokil has established a good arguable case that the respondents have engaged in a scheme of dishonest behaviour involving the falsification of invoices and other documentation which has resulted in Rentokil making payments in excess of $3.2 million. In my view, the conduct engaged in by the respondents establishes a danger or real risk that the assets will be dealt with in a way which would prevent Rentokil from recovering judgment.

Balance of convenience 35 Rentokil must show that the balance of convenience favours the making of the order: Hua Wang Bank at [13]. 36 In favour of the making of the orders is the risk that assets will be dissipated, which I consider to be a significant risk having regard to the dishonesty alleged. 37 Against the making of the order is the recognition that such an order is an extraordinary remedy and inevitably causes prejudice to the parties subject to the orders. In the present case, the prejudice is reduced by four considerations. First, Rentokil is prepared to give an appropriate undertaking as to damages. Second, the order sought by Rentokil on this urgent ex parte application will continue only for a short period until the return date, which will be before the Duty Judge in the week commencing 13 September 2021, at which time the respondents will have an opportunity to be heard. Rentokil will then bear the onus of satisfying the Court that the order should continue. Third, the terms of the orders will permit the respondents to pay their reasonable legal expenses and will permit Mr Kelly a reasonable amount for living expenses. Fourth, each freezing order is subject to a monetary cap that reflects the present state of the evidence in relation to the payments made by Rentokil. The freezing orders against Mr Kelly and JJK Property are in respect of Australian assets with an unencumbered value of $3,269,793.78. The freezing order against JJK Enterprises is in respect of Australian assets with an unencumbered value of $1,715,117.03, being the amount paid on the Macrosphere invoices into the ANZ account held by JJK Enterprises. 38 Weighing the foregoing considerations, I am satisfied that the balance of convenience presently favours the making of the freezing orders until the return date.

Ancillary orders 39 A freezing order and an asset disclosure order have the same fundamental purpose, which is "to prevent the abuse or frustration of [a court's] process in relation to matters coming within its jurisdiction": Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Shi [2021] FCA 22; (2021) 95 ALJR 634at 644 [22] (Gordon J). There needs to be timely disclosure of assets in order for freezing orders to be effective: Shi at 644 [22] (Gordon J). 40 Rentokil sought ancillary orders which went beyond the usual asset disclosure orders. As indicated at the outset, I made an asset disclosure order against each of the respondents in the usual form but declined to make the more expansive disclosure orders sought by the Rentokil on the ex parte application. 41 I was satisfied that it was appropriate to make ancillary orders in respect of the first, second and third respondents directed to identifying all of the assets of those respondents and thereby assist in preventing the dissipation of assets. The orders will also assist in the tracing of funds which appear to have been misappropriated. 42 I was not satisfied that I should make at the ex parte application orders which required Mr Kelly and JJK Investments to provide information to Rentokil as to the present whereabouts of the sums received from Rentokil between approximately 31 March 2020 and 15 July 2021 and to verify that information in an affidavit. Senior Counsel for Rentokil was not able to identify any prejudice in deferring determination of the further disclosure orders until such time as the respondents had been served.

Conclusion 43 In conclusion, I was satisfied that it was appropriate to make freezing orders largely in the form proposed by Rentokil at the ex parte hearing on 7 September 2021. I certify that the preceding forty-three (43) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justice Cheeseman.