Class action settlement approval hearings are not a time for the court to second guess a law firm’s contingency fee as set down in a group costs order, a judge has found, but the question of proportionality is still key, and evidence of a firm’s return on investment and hourly fees may be relevant to the final decision.
A judge has signed off on the first-ever settlement allowing a law firm to earn a contingency fee, approving a $12.8 million cut for Slater & Gordon in a shareholder class action against G8 Education.
A property developer has been ordered to pay $11.2 million to the liquidators of Plutus Payroll after a judge found he helped an employee of the defunct payroll services company “wash” money he blackmailed from the company’s directors.
ASIC has won its bid to appoint receivers to a managed investment scheme run by Keystone Asset Management after expressing “grave concerns” that investor funds were used to pay sports stars and buy a $4.3 million home for its former director.
A judge has thrown out a defamation case by John Peros, the former boyfriend of Shandee Blackburn, over a podcast by The Australian dealing with her murder, finding he did not suffer serious harm from the publication.
A judge has made soft class closure orders in a shareholder class action against Medibank after the High Court has been asked to resolve a split on the issue by intermediate appellate courts.
An ANZ employee has lost her application in the Fair Work Commission to work from home full time on the basis that she is over 55 years old, with a commissioner saying there was no “rational connection” between her age and the request.
Former Liberal MP Andrew Laming has been hit with a $40,000 fine for failing to disclose that he was behind three politically motivated Facebook posts in 2018 and 2019.
A judge has allowed a law firm running a shareholder class action against medical glove maker Ansell to earn a 40 per cent contingency fee, but slashed the rate for settlements or judgments over $50 million.
Publishing reasons for refusing an application by Super Retail Group to redact parts of its former chief legal officer’s case, a judge has called out the practice of “extensive” suppression applications despite the exhortations of courts that justice must be open.