Most Recent
A firm owned by solicitor Mark Elliott has reached an agreement resolving a dispute with Treasury Wine Estates over the costs the firm should pay in a stayed class action against the winemaker.
A Sydney law firm has been ordered to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in compensation and restitution for breach of its fiduciary duties, after a former client successfully appealed a conflict of interest case.
Crown Resorts has been given the greenlight to challenge a court order allowing former employees to talk to lawyers for a class action over its business in China, but the class has another chance to make its case that the ruling should stand.
Concerns about duplicative costs in multiple class actions are better addressed by case management decisions aimed at cutting excessive expense, not by limiting the amount lawyers representing group members can spend, the Full Federal Court has said in dismissing an appeal by baby food maker Bellamy's.
The barrister leading an appeal seeking to revive Quinn Emanuel's fees for no service class action against AMP has criticised the approach taken in the landmark GetSwift ruling on competing class actions, saying it placed the court in the role of auctioneer and actually encouraged duplicative proceedings.
Bellamy's has lost its appeals court battle to limit the costs incurred by lawyers jointly running two shareholder class actions against the baby food maker.
US biotechnology company Regeneron Pharmaceuticals has filed a Federal Court challenge after losing its opposition to a patent application by UK biopharmaceutical company Kymab for a method of producing an animal with part-human DNA.
Rugby league player Jack de Belin has dropped his appeal of a ruling dismissing his challenge to the National Rugby's League "no fault" stand-down rule.
Ariosa Diagnostics has asked the Full Federal Court to hear its challenge to a ruling that its Harmony prenatal test infringed Sequenom's patent for a prenatal genetic test, saying the court's judgment was attended by "sufficient doubt".
A group of media companies are appealing a groundbreaking defamation ruling that found they are liable for third-party comments made on their Facebook pages.