Martinus Rail has won its fight against grain supply chain Co-operative Bulk Handling over a $23 million payment claim for building a rail siding in WA, with a judge finding that the deadline for responding to the claim began running from a Saturday.
A construction company has lost its bid to appeal a VCAT decision determining a $1.4 million dispute against it because of its conduct in the case, with an appeals court rejecting its “narrow and technical” reading of the tribunal’s powers.
The developer of a 683-lot project in Glenmore Park, NSW has lost its bid to strike out parts of a class action by owners and investors alleging the land on which the development sits is unsuitable for residential construction.
Shine Lawyers has been hit with a negligence suit by a former client who says he lost the chance to recover damages in a personal injury case after the firm sued the wrong party.
ASIC is trying again to strike out mining magnate Clive Palmer’s case over examinations conducted by the corporate regulator, after a judge found the case was sufficiently clear.
Construction company Mossop has lost an appeal of a decision for concreter Contek, with an appeals court upholding a judgment accounting for all payment claims in the case, even those subject to agreement before trial.
NSW government-owned utility Hunter Water has been ordered to pay $1.2 million in damages to 118 owners in a townhouse block in Newcastle for flooding caused by a burst water main.
The developer of a tower in Mascot which is said to contain combustible cladding can opt out of a class action against 3A Composites and Halifax to bring its own claim for $15 million.
A judge has ordered tech company Vehicle Management Systems to hurry up and choose between damages or an account of profits in its IP dispute with the city of Melbourne over a sensor-based system for timing parked vehicles.
A judge has rejected all but two claims by ASIC in a suit against car finance provider Money3 and criticised how the regulator ran its case, saying it had consumed an “inordinate and disproportionate amount of the judicial and administrative resources of the court”.