Most Recent
A letter by King & Wood Mallesons was an unjustifiable threat of patent litigation against car accessories company Clearview, as was an announcement by the firm's client MSA, but MSA's director cannot be held liable as a joint tortfeasor under the Patents Act, a judge has found.
Allens has recruited an intellectual property expert to lead the law firm's trade mark practice from its Melbourne office.
Expect more legal battles this year over the right to work from home, with employees continuing to demand flexibility but businesses starting to push back, according to legal experts.
A former talent count for global CEO advisory firm Teneo has resolved a lawsuit against her former employer alleging she endured 16-hour workdays and was exposed to a toxic, male-dominated work culture.
A judge has given a liquidator the green light to use substituted service to serve court documents on two directors of failed iron ore producer Ochre Group whose exact whereabouts are unknown, amid concerns about transactions leading up to the company's collapse.
Martinus Rail cant stop logistics company Qube from calling on $7 million in bank guarantees as part of a dispute over the construction of the Moorebank Interstate Intermodal terminal and rail project, after a judge rejected the argument that drawing on the funds would contravene the Security of Payment Act.
The Victorian government faces a class action over its decision to redevelop Melbourne's high-rise public housing towers, with lawyers for residents calling on the state to reconsider the plan.
A former client has sued Mills Oakley and a Victorian law firm alleging they were negligent while advising on a property transaction with his parents that did not go through.
Kingfisher Mobile, which provides mobile services to Telstra customers, has taken the telecommunications giant to court for allegedly breached its contractual obligations when it engaged a new provider to take over from Kingfisher.
Sydney real estate group The Agency has lost an appeal in its trade mark case against a rival, with the Full Federal Court upholding a finding that the company would have an “unwarranted monopoly” if other businesses were barred from using the descriptive words in its name.