Most Recent
The Fair Work Ombudsman has won its underpayments case against restaurant chain Sushi Bay and its director, with a judge finding the company forced migrant workers to pay back their entitlements in cash in a “calculated and institutional effort” to conceal wrongdoing.
A nose job patient who allegedly defamed his surgeon has been slugged with $50,000 in security for his appeal, on top of a $50,000 damages bill that a judge said the surgeon is unlikely to see.
REST Super faces a class action alleging the supererannuation trustee deducted premiums for income protection insurance that provided no benefit to members.
The maker of Finish dishwashing products, RB Hygiene, has won a partial appeal in a trade mark stoush with rival Henkel, with the Full Court reviving two of its trade marks but rejecting its challenge to a logo for competing Somat-branded products.
EFTPOS provider Tyro has secured a $10 million settlement in a lawsuit accusing a unit of Canadian firm Lightspeed of violating a restraint of trade clause by encouraging Tyro customers to adopt its own competing payment system.
Herbert Smith Freehills has filed proceedings against its former client United Petroleum, seeking costs of successfully defending a lawsuit alleging it acted negligently in relation to the company’s failed initial public offering in 2016.
In a case believed to be the first of its kind, the liquidators of boiler room trader Forex Capital Trading have sued ASIC, seeking to claw back over $20 million in fines and costs they says constituted unfair preference payments and should be distributed among the company’s out-of-pocket clients.
The Australian Securities and Investments Commission has taken two units of Paladin Group and one of its directors to court for allegedly raising more than $100 million from 258 investors without a financial services licence.
The High Court has granted special to leave to a class action against Ford over allegedly PowerShift transmissions, agreeing to hear the case alongside two appeals in a class action against Toyota that deal with how reduction in value damages should be calculated under the Australian Consumer Law.
Mazda has been ordered to pay $11.5 million after a court found the Japanese car maker engaged in "appalling" customer service and misled nine purchasers of defective vehicles about their entitlement to a refund or replacement under the Australian Consumer Law.