In The News
High Court to resolve uncertainty over common fund orders
Ex-boss of AI marketing company Metigy charged with misleading investors
ATO, PepsiCo fight over royalty withholding tax goes to High Court
Banksia class action silk pushes off court appearance again
BHP says shareholders can’t expand class action because of ‘drafting error’
Australian Clinical Labs flags strike-out bid in OAIC data breach case
Optus slapped with $12m penalty over Triple-0 outage
ACCC takes Magnamail to court for misleading prize promotions
‘Influx’ of consumer class actions likely after High Court’s Toyota decision, lawyer says
‘Eye-watering’ legal costs in NT stolen wages class action: judge
Please login to bookmarkClose

A judge has found a Queensland law firm’s costs agreement void because it did not provide enough information about the firm’s uplift fee.

Subscribe for instant access to all Lawyerly content.

Already a subscriber?
Lost your password?

Contact us to enquire about group subscriptions.
error: The content is secured.

For information on rights and reprints, contact subscriptions@lawyerly.com.au