Most Recent
Australia Post unit StarTrack has won an injunction barring postal product manufacturer TMA Australia from using a website URL containing the words ‘StarTrack’, with the Full Court finding a judge wrongly held the case was ‘weak’.
Monash Health has won its challenge to a decision finding it wrongfully dismissed a librarian in a ‘sham’ redundancy.
The lead applicant in an underpayments class action against The Reject Shop has been hit with costs after his “last minute” withdrawal of a bid to add claims that the discount retail chain made misrepresentations to store managers.
A judge has dismissed a suit by a former executive producer at Network Ten who claimed she was owed nearly $400,000 in severance pay under an industry award, finding the award did not apply to senior management.
Qantas has succeeded in attacking claims that it created a workplace that was “hostile to women”, leveled in a former female pilot’s sex discrimination and sexual harassment lawsuit.
A judge has adjourned a trial in a case brought by junior doctors seeking to recoup alleged unpaid overtime, despite noting his annoyance over the applicants’ “180 degree turn” on the question of whether the hearing should await delivery of judgment in a related case.
The Full Court has held a Sydney Trains driver who worked the morning after blowing over four times the legal limit is entitled to a rehearing, finding the Fair Work Commission failed to properly consider a section of its own founding legislation.
Discount retail chain The Reject Shop has foreshadowed two challenges to an underpayments class action, claiming store managers were not covered by the general retail award and that their allegations have to be run individually.
A Melbourne law firm has lost its appeal of a $184,000 judgment in favour of a former junior lawyer who earned hundreds of thousands of dollars per year under a lucrative pay structure.
DRA Global has failed to keep under wraps passages from its former CEO's lawsuit which the engineering firm argued would cause “serious reputational and commercial harm” if published.