Most Recent
A court has barred a law firm from acting in a partnership dispute because one of its solicitors could be a material witness in the case, finding there was a potential conflict between the duty of loyalty the lawyer owed to his clients and his obligation to be honest with the court.
A former capital partner has called on HWL Ebsworth to produce communications between managing partner Juan Martinez and other members of the management team that allegedly preceded a decision to shut him out of the law firm’s plans to float on the ASX.
Mining engineering company Destec has won its bid to use evidence produced in a dispute with Mineral Resources in considering whether to bring a new case against its former director over a lucrative transportation system.
The High Court has declined to hear an appeal by Clive Palmer’s Queensland Nickel refinery over a decision ordering it pay $26.6 million for natural gas charges.
A judge has declined Expert Group’s bid to bring court proceedings about the amount of an earn-out owed under its agreement to sell cloud services provider Experteq IT Services, finding the firm had agreed to resolve the matter by expert determination.
The High Court has agreed to weigh in on whether proportionate liability defences can be applied in the context of commercial arbitration.
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.
A judge has approved a $5 million class action settlement against payment processor Tyro over a service outage but has shredded the proposed funder payout and legal fees that would have comprised 60 per cent of the sum, calling the costs "outrageous".
An appeals court has found a seven-year non-competition clause in US tech giant DXC Eclipse's agreement with the former director of Melbourne software firm Sable37, which it acquired in 2018, was unreasonable.
The company behind the Ultimate Fighting Championship gym franchise has been ordered to pay $5 million to three franchisees after a judge found it misled them about businesses which were “near valueless” and unlikely to make profit.