Most Recent
Radio Rentals and its insurer, AIG, have reached a $29 million settlement in a consumer class action alleging the company pushed misleading 'Rent, Try, $1 Buy' leases onto vulnerable customers.
A consumer class action against Radio Rentals over its 'Rent, Try, $1 Buy' scheme is "very close" to settling, a court heard Monday, with just a few more days required to negotiate a final agreement.
Engineering firm WorleyParsons has told the Federal Court it will press forward with a no case application in an attempt to shut down a shareholder class action against it.
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.
WorleyParsons may seek to shut down a shareholder class action against it due to an "insuperable obstacle" caused by last minute pleading amendments, the engineering firm told a court at the outset of a 21-day hearing.
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.
The applicants in the Radio Rentals “Rent, Try $1 Buy” class action have flagged the potential for prejudice caused by the respondents’ late evidence, with concerns about their capacity to be ready by the looming trial date if ongoing settlement negotiations hit a dead-end.
A judge has questioned a common fund application in a class action against two IAG entities over allegedly worthless add-on insurance, saying there may be a "degree of chaos" if the order was approved only to be undone by a pending High Court decision.
South Korea's Samsung C&T Corporation has launched two bids in Singapore to set aside a US$94 million (AU$138 million) award relating to its dispute with Spanish energy company Duro Felguera over the Pilbara-based Roy Hill iron ore mine.
AFT Pharmaceuticals has challenged a Federal Court decision that found its Maxisegic ads were misleading and deceptive, saying the judge "set the bar too high" by requiring it to prove there was an adequate scientific foundation for its painkiller representations.