not cross-examined and his evidence was therefore unchallenged. Rabbi Gutnick was cross-examined and the primary judge did not accept certain aspects of his evidence as identified later in these reasons.

Impact of sanctions on Mr Barukh

Mr Barukh gave evidence of the impact that the sanctions would have on him if they were imposed. He stated that they would have severe consequences on him not only personally, but also in his capacity as director and CEO of Live Group and the other associated entities of which he was director and CEO. This in turn would impact upon persons employed by those entities and customers throughout Australia. Mr Barukh also stated that he was extremely concerned that any such sanctions would impact upon his good name and reputation, which he hasdispute or the agreement between Live Group and SalesPort. Sought injunctive relief to restrain the appellants from taking any step that would involve the imposition of any of the religious sanctions referred to in the email of 29 December 2016. Sought declarations:

that the agreement between Live Group and SalesPort was not an arbitration agreement with the meaning of the Commercial Arbitration Act 2010 (NSW) or the International Arbitration Act 1974 (Cth); and that the appellants in their capacity as representatives of the Sydney Beth Din had no jurisdiction to conduct any arbitration proceedings under either the Commercial Arbitration Act or the International Arbitration Act and that any award issued by the Sydney Beth Din in respect of the alleged commercial dispute under either Act was of no force