Most Recent
First common fund order granted in the wake of High Court ruling

A judge has made a common fund order in approving a $3 million settlement in a class action against mortgage lending and investment company RMBL, the first common fund order granted since the High Court shot down these orders in the early stages of class actions.

Subscribe to Lawyerly to access this article.

Already a subscriber?

Lost your password?

Class can’t access insurance docs in action over ‘illusory’ car warranties

The applicant in a $47.6 million class action against a unit of car leasing company McMillan Shakespeare has been denied access to insurance documents sought to determine the value of the case, with a judge saying access would “distort the playing field”.

Subscribe to Lawyerly to access this article.

Already a subscriber?

Lost your password?

No duty of care owed to Centrelink recipients, gov’t says in Robodebt class action defence

Defending against a $300 million class action brought by Centrelink recipients over its Robodebt scheme, the Federal Government has told a court it did not owe a duty of care to people receiving benefits.

Subscribe to Lawyerly to access this article.

Already a subscriber?

Lost your password?

RMBL to pay $3M to settle class action

Mortgage lending and investment company RMBL has agreed to pay $3 million to settle a class action alleging it charged excessive fees on loans and made misleading representations under its contributory mortgage fund scheme.

Subscribe to Lawyerly to access this article.

Already a subscriber?

Lost your password?

Top 10 class action settlements of 2019

Companies and other defendants forked over big sums last year to settle more than 20 class actions, with a total of at least $734 million being paid out. Here are the top 10 class action settlements and the law firms and funders that negotiated them. 

Subscribe to Lawyerly to access this article.

Already a subscriber?

Lost your password?

Dover can seek access to ASIC files in bid to prove ‘Orwellian’ client protection policy harmed no one

Defunct Dover Financial, which faces a penalty hearing next year after it was found to have misled customers with an inaptly titled ‘client protection policy’, can bring an application for evidence from the corporate regulator that the policy did not harm anyone.

Subscribe to Lawyerly to access this article.

Already a subscriber?

Lost your password?

IMF drops fight over commission in settled Murray Goulburn class action

Litigation funder IMF Bentham has thrown in the towel in a battle over its cut of a $42 million settlement in a class action against dairy cooperative Murray Goulburn, accepting the Federal Court’s proposed 25 per cent commission rate after initially seeking 32 per cent.

Subscribe to Lawyerly to access this article.

Already a subscriber?

Lost your password?

$42M Murray Goulburn settlement wins approval, but fight over funder’s cut still on

Two months after rejecting the deal because the litigation funder’s cut appeared excessive, a judge has approved a $42 million class action settlement with Murray Goulburn while the funder keeps up the fight over its commission.

Subscribe to Lawyerly to access this article.

Already a subscriber?

Lost your password?

‘Orwellian doublespeak’: Judge lashes Dover Financial’s client protection policy

The Australian Securities and Investments Commission has won its case against defunct financial advisor Dover Financial and its former director, who famously collapsed during the banking royal commission, with a judge saying the company engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct through its inaptly titled ‘client protection policy’.

Subscribe to Lawyerly to access this article.

Already a subscriber?

Lost your password?

Funder won’t fight court’s power to vary class action commission

Whether judges can alter the terms of litigation funding agreements in class actions is a question that will remain unsettled for now, after litigation funder IMF Bentham chose to sidestep a lengthy, costly and risky challenge to the reach of the court’s powers.

Subscribe to Lawyerly to access this article.

Already a subscriber?

Lost your password?