The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has raised preliminary competition concerns about Endeavour Group’s proposed acquisition of the Beachfront Hotel north of Darwin, saying it could stymie competition in the local market for takeaway liquor.
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has taken online florist Bloomex to court for allegedly violating the Australian Consumer Law by posting misleading customer ratings on its website.
US lingerie and beauty giant Victoria’s Secret has won undertakings from Chemist Warehouse to stop selling allegedly fake fragrance products until a trade mark suit against the pharmacy giant is decided.
A judge has cut at least $170,000 from the fees sought by a law firm running a class action on behalf of Drakes Supermarkets store managers who were allegedly underpaid — the same firm that saw its fees reduced in two similar class actions.
US lingerie and beauty giant Victoria’s Secret has taken Chemist Warehouse to court for allegedly selling counterfeit perfumes.
Keeping up her scrutiny of fee disclosures by Adero Law in employment class actions launched in her court, a judge has questioned whether the law firm breached its fiduciary duty to the lead applicant in litigation against Drakes Supermarkets.
Eco-conscious Australian skincare company Sukin has been hit with a lawsuit alleging it misled consumers by selling products labelled with a carbon neutral certification it did not hold.
A judge overseeing two underpayment class actions against supermarket chain Romeo’s has declined to vary a settlement agreement to provide for distribution by Christmas, saying plaintiff firm Adero Law had not taken “all reasonable steps” to facilitate the payments.
A judge overseeing two underpayments class actions against supermarket chain Romeo’s has rejected a bid for a private costs assessor by Adero Law, which will now go unpaid until at least January.
The maker of Finish dishwashing products has appealed a judgment that removed two of its trade marks for non-use and rejected its claim that a competitor’s logo was deceptively similar.