In The News
Test
Test
I’m afraid AI can’t do that: Law firms say smart tech uses limited
Holden dealers reject GM’s bleak alternate reality in class action
Lawyer’s defamation case fails serious harm test, judge finds
Nine, News Corp defeat defamation suits over Central Coast crime coverage
Zip offered Firstmac $4M to settle trade mark suit
High Court rejects Qantas appeal in ground crew sacking case
High Court to rule on reach of workplace law in high-stakes Qantas case
Mosaic Brands boss told GM paying $275K bonus would land him in jail, suit says

A finding this week that Norton Rose Fulbright intentionally misled a former lawyer in an employment dispute and abused the court’s processes threatens the legal career of an equity partner at the firm and is a warning to all firms to think twice before representing themselves in cases involving soured professional relationships.

Subscribe to Lawyerly to access this article.

Already a subscriber?
Lost your password?
Related articles
Norton Rose Fulbright must pay $160,000 for ‘intentionally misleading’ ex-partner
Ashley Cameron 2020-11-16 11:25 pm By Christine Caulfield
Ex-Norton Rose partner can’t block King & Wood Mallesons from acting for former firm
Appeals 2020-01-07 11:25 pm By Cat Fredenburgh
Norton Rose admits backdating signature on filing, says court OK’d it
Business of Law 2017-11-08 11:25 pm By Christine Caulfield
Third judge in Norton Rose ex-partner dispute refuses to step down amid accusations of ‘absurdly obtuse’ bias
Bernice Ng 2019-08-29 11:25 pm By Amelia Birnie

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