On appeal of a $6 million judgment for misleading statements, Dominique Grubisa and her wealth education company DG Institute have argued her advice was based on faulty knowledge, not ill intentions.
United Petroleum will not face cross-claims by franchisees, with a judge calling the bid “a very colourable application” to create overlap with a class action in the Supreme Court.
United Petroleum and director Ari Silver can wait for the rehearing of a security for costs bid before filing defences to a franchisee class action alleging misleading conduct.
The ACCC has secured $6 million in penalties against wealth education company DG Institute and its CEO Dominique Grubisa, as well as orders that the company refund $14.7 million in course fees to customers who enrolled in its ‘Master Wealth Control’ program.
Sydney lawyer and wealth guru Dominique Grubisa is challenging a finding in an ACCC case that her seminars made misleading statements and has sought to pause the court action until her appeal is heard, a bid a judge has warned won’t be “favourably received” by him.
In a win for the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, a court has found Dominique Grubisa’s DG Institute made misleading statements to students who paid up to $9,000 to enrol in her property investment and wealth management programs.
A franchise class action against United Petroleum has asked a court for leave to expand the class action to include a group of commission agents and to add the oil company’s parent as a third defendant.
A franchisee class action against United Petroleum over the installation of allegedly loss-making Pie Face stores at its franchise sites has succeeded in fending off the petrol company’s bid for security, with a judge agreeing it would have a chilling effect on the unfunded case.
The law firm that’s running a franchisee class action against United Petroleum over allegedly loss-making Pie Faces stores has has won its bid to peek at draft communications the oil giant wants to send to group members.
United Petroleum, which is facing a franchisee class action over allegedly loss-making Pie Face stores, is resisting a plaintiff law firm’s bid for “a right of veto” over the petrol giant’s communications with group members, even those not represented by the firm.