The High Court has agreed to weigh in on whether property data analytics firm CoreLogic infringed a real estate photographer’s copyright by uploading images from realestate.com.au to its platform.
The High Court won’t hear a challenge to a decision finding a Canberra property developer that misled investors about GST on its apartments did not have to pay for losses alleged in a class action against it.
The High Court has rejected a bid by shareholders of collapsed investment advisory firm Babcock & Brown for special leave to seek a re-trial of their cases alleging disclosure breaches because of the trial judge’s “excessive” three-year delay in delivering judgment.
The Full Court has overturned a landmark judgment which found artificial intelligence can be named as an inventor on patent applications, in a decision which brings Australia in line with findings from courts in the UK, US and EU.
The consumer watchdog is challenging a court ruling that found Mazda’s treatment of customers with defective vehicles was “appalling” but did not amount to unconscionable conduct.
The High Court has ordered the building and construction union to pay a maximum fine of $63,000 for telling workers they could not be on a job site if they were not union members, saying its serial offending showed it had no “regard for the law”.
The High Court has reinstated a $435,000 judgment awarded to a former lawyer who suffered post-traumatic stress disorder while working for the Special Sexual Offences unit in Victoria’s Office of Public Prosecutions.
Real estate giant CBRE Group has won its appeal in a dispute with defunct fund manager City Pacific, which claimed the company negligently valued a Queensland marina at $27.3 million in 2006 and caused millions in losses.
Engineering company Worley is challenging an appeals court ruling that allowed a shareholder class action against it to continue, arguing the Full Court’s finding that opinions which “ought reasonably to have been held” should be disclosed to shareholders would lead to “absurd consequences”.
An appeals court’s finding that the federal government does not owe a duty of care to Australian kids to protect them from the effects of climate change will stand after the lead applicants declined to take the matter to the High Court.