Changes to AMP’s buyer of last resort policy that reduced the multiple by which the wealth management firm would purchase advisers’ client registers was necessary to protect the business from a ‘BOLR run’, a court had been told.
US women’s clothing retailer Ann Taylor has come up short in its opposition to Nike’s bid to register the ‘Aeoroloft’ mark for its brand of lightweight fitness apparel, with an IP Australia finding the mark is not deceptively similar to Ann Taylor’s ‘Loft’ mark.
Fintech Zip Co has successfully opposed rival Flexigroup’s attempt to trade mark ‘No Interest Ever!’, in the latest trade mark battle between buy now, pay later service providers in Australia.
Australia’s leading livestock group cannot block US company Branhaven from amending its application for a bovine genome patent, which the group has worried could harm the Australian cattle industry’s ability to use genetic tests.
Merck Sharp & Dohme has dropped a lawsuit brought against a unit of Indian generic manufacturer Lupin for allegedly threatening to infringe the patent for its multibillion-dollar diabetes drugs Januvia and Janumet.
Professional services firm EY UK has been added as a respondent in a shareholder class action against Pitcher Partners over advice given to law firm Slater and Gordon in its disastrous $1.3 billion acquisition of the UK-based Quindell in 2015, almost two years after the class action was filed.
Australian Financial Review columnist Joe Aston sent “very nasty” text messages about venture capitalist Elaine Stead, and any in-person mediation ahead of Stead’s defamation trial is unlikely to be worthwhile given the animosity between the pair, a court has been told.
The High Court has declined to weigh in on the patentability of software, rejecting e-commerce company Rokt’s bid for review of a decision striking down its marketing invention.
Five investment banks facing a class action for their alleged rigging of foreign exchange rates have slammed the “unclear” and “incredibly vague” case, saying it contains “literally trillions” of possible variations of the cartel agreement allegedly entered into.
A court has ordered comparison website iSelect to pay $8.5 million in penalties for making misleading representations through its online electricity comparison service and pushing plans to consumers that were not necessarily best suited for them.