One of two law firms running competing class actions against Coles and Woolworths over alleged illusory discounts has bowed out, leaving its rival to pursue the cases for consumers.
Law firms running competing class actions against Coles and Woolworths over alleged illusory discounts have agreed to join forces, but a judge has warned he will not simply “rubber stamp” the arrangement.
A second law firm has lodged class actions against Coles and Woolworths on the back of the consumer regulator’s claims that the supermarket giants’ discount campaigns were misleading.
Two law firms that were set to run competing class actions against Coles and Woolworths over alleged illusory discounts have reached an in-principle agreement to collaborate.
Law firm Gerard Malouf & Partners will move for a solicitors’ common fund order in a class action against Philips Electronics, which will give it an effective contingency fee in the event of a win or settlement.
A personal injury firm that lost out to a class action heavyweight in a contest to run a case against Toyota unit Hino has dropped its appeal and will wear the costs it incurred in bringing its case.
Although carefully reasoned, last week’s landmark judgment by the Full Federal Court finding power to grant contingency fees to class action solicitors has placed the question of statutory authority to award settlement common fund orders on more unsteady ground than before, experts say.
The plaintiffs in two competing class actions against Mercedes-Benz over alleged defeat devices designed to cheat regulatory emissions tests have agreed to temporarily stay the first-filed proceeding so that one filed over a year later can go ahead, a court has heard.
A judge has set aside subpoenas in a class action against Mercedes-Benz over alleged emissions cheating seeking material to identify group members and clarify the composition of the class, finding they were not issued for a legitimate forensic purpose.
A law firm that lost a contest to run a class action against Toyota unit Hino has appealed a decision to give the case to a larger rival based on past experience, saying the ruling would act as a deterrent to smaller firms wanting to enter the market for group proceedings.