The end of the common fund order is a setback for class actions that will see a revival of the days of closed proceedings, costly bookbuilding, higher commission rates and the shelving of worthy but risky cases, experts say, and all eyes will now turn to state and federal governments to see how they respond to calls for legislative intervention.
Israel Folau settles dispute with Rugby Australia over dismissal
AMP group exec says bullying claims by former GC were news to her
AMP’s group executive says she was never told of bullying claims made against her by former general counsel Larissa Cook until the lawyer filed a $2.7 million lawsuit alleging “hostile, aggressive and intimidating behaviour” in response to complaints she made about AMP’s fees for no service conduct.
Sony skips level in ACCC’s PlayStation lawsuit
Judge allows hindsight evidence in lawsuit over Metal Storm’s collapse
Clive Palmer ‘didn’t like the price’ of Twisted Sister licence, court hears
5 takeaways from the High Court’s common fund ruling
More than a decade after the High Court ruled that third parties could finance legal proceedings in Australia, the court has issued another game changing decision that puts limits on what judges will do to help a litigation funder out. Here, Lawyerly gives you a quick guide to the key takeaways from Wednesday’s judgment.
Common fund orders in class actions dealt fatal blow by High Court
Domino’s attacks class action, says franchisee representations were opinion not fact
Greater cooperation between regulators, class action litigants would remove substantial barriers
The close relationship between regulator action over corporate wrongdoing and private enforcement is an established and powerful means of recovering compensation for victims of corporate misconduct. Increased cooperation between regulators and litigants in class actions would remove a number of substantial barriers to private enforcement action, writes Slater and Gordon lawyer Caitlin Baker.