Most Recent
EY may seek damages against rival consulting firm Alvarez & Marsal after it won preliminary discovery to pursue possible claims over a mass departure of partners and staff from its international tax practice.
National Australia Bank and its home loan lender subsidiary have been ordered to pay a $15.5 million penalty after admitting to mishandling hundreds of customer hardship applications.
Construction PRO
Commercial property fund Elanor Funds Management has hit back at "factually incorrect" claims made by Lederer Group as part of a $285 million takeover bid.
Construction PRO
Port of Newcastle has failed in its bid for declarations following its defeat of of Glencore Coal's case over wharfage fees, despite arguing further disputes could be avoided.
A judge has refused a bid by the Port of Newcastle to make declarations following the dismissal of Glencore Coal's case claiming it was overcharged $874,000 in wharfage fees, saying her judgment was clear on its face.
Maurice Blackburn is seeking a 33 per cent cut of any settlement in a class action against Sportsbet, arguing that law firms "doing well" for themselves by running class actions is an inherent feature of the contingency fee scheme.
Construction PRO
A court has ordered a stay of proceedings in a Melbourne property dispute, saying whether it could hear the case "better" than VCAT, as alleged by builder Brocon, was not the point.
Construction PRO
A prominent Perth property developer who claims he was defamed by two WAToday articles has lost his bid to plead the existence of a conspiracy between publisher Fairfax and others, including Liberal MP Andrew Hastie and the former leader of the WA Liberals.
Construction PRO
Law firm HWL Ebsworth, which was found liable for negligence over advice on a Parramatta land development, has lost its opposition to a referee process for calculating damages.
The directors of payday lenders Cigno and BSF have filed for special leave to appeal a decision that found them liable for unlicensed credit activity, saying the case raises fundamental questions about the scope of accessorial liability.