Looking for a slice of the class actions pie in Australia, UK plaintiffs firm Pogust Goodhead has launched an office in Sydney, headed by two lawyers from boutique Crichton & Co.
Herbert Smith Freehills has filed proceedings against its former client United Petroleum, seeking costs of successfully defending a lawsuit alleging it acted negligently in relation to the company’s failed initial public offering in 2016.
Commonwealth Bank of Australia and subsidiary CommSec have been hit with $10.34 million in penalties — the highest ever imposed in enforcement action by the workplace regulator — after admitting it underpaid thousands of employees more than $16 million.
The owner of womens’ networking group ‘Business Chicks’ has sued Fairfax over allegedly defamatory articles which she claims painted her as a hypocrite who unfairly fired a pregnant employee and fostered a toxic workplace culture.
In a case believed to be the first of its kind, the liquidators of boiler room trader Forex Capital Trading have sued ASIC, seeking to claw back over $20 million in fines and costs they says constituted unfair preference payments and should be distributed among the company’s out-of-pocket clients.
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has raised concerns about the owner of realestate.com.au acquiring a national forms platform used by real estate agents, saying it could “significantly harm competitors”.
Maddocks has recruited a special counsel from Ashurst to head up its trade marks and brand protection practice.
A judge has found that Lisa Wilkinson acted reasonably in ditching Network Ten’s legal team in a defamation case brought by Bruce Lehrmann, noting the “distrust” between the presenter and her former employer as well as other matters, including a retainer Ten’s solicitors had with The Australian newspaper.
The High Court has granted special to leave to a class action against Ford over allegedly PowerShift transmissions, agreeing to hear the case alongside two appeals in a class action against Toyota that deal with how reduction in value damages should be calculated under the Australian Consumer Law.
Mazda has been ordered to pay $11.5 million after a court found the Japanese car maker engaged in “appalling” customer service and misled nine purchasers of defective vehicles about their entitlement to a refund or replacement under the Australian Consumer Law.