Barristers

ARN Media has reached a $12 million settlement with radio personality Kyle Sandilands, who sued the network over its decision to scrap his 10-year $100 million contract following an on-air fight with co-host Jackie 'O' Henderson.

A judge has accepted that Cbus’ agreement to buy a 50 per cent stake in Sydney’s troubled Halo Tower could fall through if the beleaguered developer behind the project is forced to remain in administration, shooting down a challenge to a DOCA.

A former financial advisor and his company have won court approval to run a claim challenging AMP's buyer of last resort policy, despite the company being a group member in a related class action that settled for $100 million in 2023. 

Swiss drug maker Novartis has lost its bid to have Pharmacor's Valtresto trade mark removed for non use, with an IP Australia delegate finding that an injunction in a fight over the patent for Novartis' heart drug Entresto was an obstacle to using the mark. 

A judge has refused an egg producer's bid for a non-party costs order against Melbourne firm Gordon Legal, saying he was not satisfied the filing of a defective notice was sufficient to invoke the court’s wasted costs jurisdiction.

The trustee for Dexus' airport fund is seeking judicial advice on a possible challenge to a court decision forcing it to relinquish a lucrative stake in the operator of Tullamarine.

A class action by the owners of a residential Sydney building is challenging a ruling for Alucobond panel maker 3A Composites and supplier Halifax Vogel, which found developers were responsible for ensuring the cladding's safety.

The Commonwealth Bank wants Cornwalls to pay its costs in a negligence case by a former client, saying the law firm should foot the bill for claiming proportionate liability against the bank.

A class action is challenging the Federal Court's post-trial ruling for Alucobond panel maker 3A Composites and supplier Halifax Vogel.

DC Comics is taking another swing at a Sydney man's bid to register 'kryptonite diet' as a trade mark, arguing he acted "willfully blind" or in bad faith in registering the mark given its sizable reputation in the fictional substance from the Superman franchise.