On Tuesday this week ARN filed its defence against Kyle Sandilands lawsuit in the Federal Court.

Shortly afterwards, the company also filed a cross claim against Kyle, moving its legal strategy from defence to attack.

According to submissions given in court on Friday 24th April, the basis for the ARN cross claim is that Kyle and Jackie breached their contracts, so ARN wants the money back that has already been paid.

ARN’s submission to the court lists previous occasions before the February 2026 on air argument, in its defence case against Kyle’s court action. One previous occasion discussed in the defence submission says:

• On 11 September 2025, Ms Henderson sent a text message to Mr Derek Bargwanna, Head of the KIIS Network, saying “Yeah it’s fine today. But let’s make sure Hamish [McLennan] and Ciaran [Davis] start to think about how to address this. We are getting a lot of complaints from listeners, calling it an abusive relationship, women especially. I can send you though some [of] the examples.”

• On 15 September 2025, Ms Henderson, through her agent, Ms Gemma O’Neill, made a complaint of bullying by Mr Sandilands via a telephone call to Ms Lauren Joyce, ARN’s Chief Audiences & Content Officers.

• On 16 September 2025, Ms Joyce sent an email to Ms O’Neill, which amongst other things requested that Ms Henderson provide full details about the conduct about which she complained and about her concerns, which letter stated as follows:

Dear Gemma,

Following our call yesterday, I want to acknowledge the seriousness of what you shared regarding the argument between Kyle and Jackie and Jackie’s feelings of being bullied. I want to be clear — this is a serious matter, and Jackie’s wellbeing is our priority.

As you know, ARN has obligations under the Fair Work Act to ensure a safe workplace, including protecting people from risks to their psychological health. We are absolutely committed to upholding those obligations and to making sure Jackie feels safe, supported, and respected.

To enable us to respond appropriately, we would be grateful if Jackie could provide full details of the incident and her concerns. This will allow us to carry out a fair and thorough workplace investigation and, importantly, to understand how best to support her. Any information Jackie provides will, of course, be treated with strict confidentiality for now. She can share this with me directly, with Angie Herridge (Acting Chief People Officer, at […]), or if preferred, via our independent whistleblower service here: […]

Please let me know when we might expect Jackie’s account so that we can progress quickly. We will handle this with the utmost care and sensitivity, with Jackie’s wellbeing at the centre of every step.

• On 16 September 2025, Ms O’Neill responded to that email, declining to provide any further detail, by saying:

Hi Lauren,

Thanks for your note and hope you’re well today! Jackie has already spoken and messaged with DB [Mr Bargwanna] about this particular incident. He’ll have info on what happened and I suspect he’ll have the off air / on air audio too. He would be best bet to chat to with regards to this and what occurred.

• On or about 8 December 2025, Ms Henderson said to Mr Bargwanna words to the effect that no further action was required from ARN in relation to her complaint made through Ms O’Neill on 15 September 2025.

After the February 2026 on air argument, Jackie lodged a complaint through her lawyers:

The Complaint Letter alleged that Mr Sandilands had repeatedly bullied Ms Henderson in the workplace.

Particulars

1. The Complaint Letter included: “this letter does not intend to set out all events that our client may rely on to evidence both the systemic and ongoing patterns of bullying and disrespectful behaviour towards her by Mr Sandilands and the repeated failure of the Group to either discipline Mr Sandilands or take the necessary action to cease and prevent workplace bullying and remove a risk to the workplace health and safety of persons engaged by the Group”.
2. The Complaint Letter included: “On the morning of 20 February 2026, Ms Henderson was again the subject of incessant bullying from her KIIS 106.5 co-host, Mr Sandilands on live radio…. At no stage during the segment did anyone at the Group attempt to stop the bullying or protect Ms Henderson from the ongoing threats to her career, character, reputation and professional standing.”
3. The Complaint Letter included: “During that segment, Mr Sandilands made repeated, relentless and factually inaccurate comments about Ms Henderson’s character and ability to perform her role…”
4. The Complaint Letter included: “The Group has been previously well aware, including by being notified by Ms Henderson, of Mr Sandilands’ bullying and a review of your internal records should set out the extent of this including the specific incidents that have been reported to

Our client has other examples and audio (both on air and off air) to support a claim of repeated and constant workplace bullying that she has endured at the hands of Mr Sandilands as well as numerous witnesses to the behaviour within the workplace. The mere fact that this behaviour is frequent and has been continuing for a prolonged period of time also goes to demonstrate that the Group has not taken the required action to act in compliance with its obligations to provide a safe place of work.

The consistent and ongoing bullying has left Ms Henderson psychologically unwell and has defamed and humiliated her in a public forum that has been reported in News.com.au, Daily Telegraph, Daily Mail, Herald Sun, Sydney Morning Herald, The Age, 7NEWS, the ABC, Mediaweek, PerthNow and an extensive list of television, print and online news outlets.”

5. The Complaint Letter included: “Should a report be made to SafeWork NSW, it is now highly likely that the Group will be found to have breached its duty of care to Ms Henderson by exposing her to Mr Sandilands’ bullying conduct over a prolonged ”
6. The Complaint Letter included: “The Group has been responsible for publishing and distributing material about Ms Henderson that is untrue and has and will cause serious harm to her reputation, both personally and professionally. Therefore, this has also now caused our client to consider the issue of defamation proceedings and there can be no doubt that the statements made will satisfy the required threshold of serious harm if judicially examined.”
7. The Complaint Letter included: “The simple fact is that our client has been attacked and bullied on live prime time radio. There is evidence that she has endured persistent and relentless bullying by Mr Sandilands well before the 20 February 2026 incident which despite numerous opportunities, the Group has failed to adequately address both at law and ethically.”

The Complaint Letter stated (amongst other things), under the heading “Alternate arrangements now required by Ms Henderson”, that “our client cannot continue to work with Mr Sandilands“.

The Complaint Letter unequivocally conveyed the objective meaning that Ms Henderson would not present a radio program with Mr Sandilands again, according to ARN’s submissioin to the court.