Most Recent
HWL Ebsworth is on the hook for the legal costs of an unfair dismissal case won by ex-partner Tim Griffiths, and the law firm must pay almost two years of legal bills on an indemnity basis after it twice refused an offer of settlement.
Herbert Smith Freehills cannot recover its costs for successfully representing itself in litigation with United Petroleum over the company's aborted initial public offering, with an appeals court finding the High Court's recent ruling eliminating the so-called Chorley exception for self-represented lawyers applies to law firms as well.
An appeals court has slashed a $450,000 judgment against law firm HWL Ebsworth to $127,000, after finding a former partner who sued the firm for unfair dismissal had not lost the opportunity to seek other employment.
HWL Ebsworth claims it was justified in firing a former partner for being dishonest about why he printed out confidential material, as the firm challenges a $450,000 unfair dismissal judgment.
The consumer watchdog is appealing a ruling dismissing its case against TPG over contract terms that allowed the internet provider to keep customers' unused prepaid funds on phone or internet plans.
Nationwide News is backpedaling from claims that a $2.9 million defamation judgment won by actor Geoffrey Rush should be overturned because of apprehended bias on the part of the trial judge.
Internet provider TPG says it has been “vindicated” by a judge’s decision to throw out the consumer watchdog’s case over allegedly unfair contract terms that allowed the telco to keep millions of dollars of customer’s unused prepaid funds.
Two Australian companies have won their application for special leave to the High Court as they continue their fight to shut down a wrongful death case in the US brought by the families of 15 people killed in an aircraft crash near Lockhart River in northern Queensland in May 2005.
The High Court has done away with a rule that allowed self-represented lawyers to claim costs for legal proceedings, calling the exception an "affront to the fundamental value of equality of all persons before the law".
AFT Pharmaceuticals has challenged a Federal Court decision that found its Maxisegic ads were misleading and deceptive, saying the judge "set the bar too high" by requiring it to prove there was an adequate scientific foundation for its painkiller representations.