A judge has approved a “disappointing” $25 million settlement in long-running class action litigation over the collapse of electronics retailer Dick Smith with claims worth hundreds of millions of dollars.
ASIC has fired back at iSignthis’ defence to the regulator’s claims that it violated the Corporations Act by not disclosing $3 million in one-off revenue related to integration agreements, saying it was not the job of its compliance officials to school the fintech on its disclosure obligations.
ASIC has launched its first case related to the COVID-19 pandemic, targeting personal lender ClearLoans for allegedly contravening the hardship provisions of the credit laws that resulted in “significant consumer harm”.
APRA has closed its probe into Westpac after finding no evidence it breached anti-money laundering laws, but the regulator has maintained a requirement that the bank hold a minimum of $1 billion in capital to reflect its higher operational risk.
A judge has questioned fintech company Squirrel Super’s defence in ASIC’s case alleging it made false and misleading statements about returns on property investments, saying it “looked like a bit of a stretch” at first glance.
The Commonwealth Bank of Australia has told a judge there’s no chance it will admit to ASIC’s allegations that it accepted conflicted remuneration through the sale of its Essential Super product, likening the matter to ASIC’s failed ‘Wagyu and shiraz’ case against Westpac.
Bendigo and Adelaide Bank has lost its appeal of a ruling that revoked its 22-year-old ‘community bank’ trade mark, with the Full Federal Court agreeing that the phrase has an ordinary signification and cannot be trade marked for the bank’s services.
In another victory for ASIC in a case stemming from the banking royal commission, a judge has ruled that TAL Life Limited breached the Insurance Contracts Act after denying coverage to a cancer patient and threatening to recover $24,000 it had already paid to her.
Lawyers and experts welcomed the High Court’s ruling Wednesday, which approved a class action beauty parade approach to dealing with competing proceedings and provided guidance as to how judges might otherwise manage the problem of duplicative cases. Here, Lawyerly outlines the important things to take away from the majority’s judgment.
The High Court has ruled that the tax office was not obliged to refund money for tax surpluses mistakenly issued under the GST Act, in a long-running legal dispute between the Commissioner of Taxation and foreign currency exchange Travelex.