The battle of the bunnies has begun as London-based soft toy designer Jellycat sues Kmart for stocking an alleged knockoff of its eminently popular ‘Bashful Bunny’ plush toy.
Class action settlement totals skyrocketed to over $900 million last year, and one law firm negotiated the lion’s share, with $672 million in settlements under its belt.
Apple has fired back in a lawsuit alleging its iPhone and iPad devices equipped with Touch ID and Face ID technology infringe patents held by an Australian non-practicing entity, hitting the company with its own case claiming the patents are invalid.
Investors in collapsed stockbroker Halifax Investment Services have failed to overturn decisions in Australia and New Zealand relating to the date of realisation of their investments which have decreased the amount they can recover in the company’s liquidation.
The Australian Taxation Office will have “commercial discussions” with Gold Coast property developer James Raptis before deciding whether to seek summary judgment in a case over $109.5 million in alleged tax avoidance.
The Australian Taxation Office has won an urgent bid to freeze the assets of James Raptis and 11 associated entities, after accusing the Queensland property developer of dodging $109.5 million in taxes since 2000.
Apple has been hit with a lawsuit alleging iPhone and iPad devices sold in Australia since at least 2014 and equipped with Touch and Face ID technology infringe two patents held by a non-practicing entity.
EY has reached an in-principle settlement in a case brought by Melbourne-based joint venture Shepparton Partners Collective alleging the consulting giant was negligent, but the firm copped a dressing down from a judge on Thursday for asking him to keep its motion to toss the case on ice.
Six of the world’s largest car makers have agreed to pay $52 million to settle class actions accusing them of selling cars with deadly Takata airbags.
Truck company Isuzu has asked a court to shut down an $18 million lawsuit by Directed Electronics alleging copyright infringement, arguing that its own cross-claims –which substantially overlap with allegations in a 2017 case that went to trial — made it an abuse of process.