Most Recent
An appeals court has shot down funder Augusta's challenge to a decision that cut its commission in the Opal Tower class action, putting funders on notice that they will have to marshal compelling evidence to win approval for their returns from an increasingly watchful court.
A recent decision by the Federal Court that questioned whether the introduction of a serious harm test in defamation law could infringe the Judiciary Act has shone a light on the need for a federal defamation framework, legal experts say.
A judge overseeing an investor class action over the collapse of advisory firm Linchpin Capital has questioned whether he has to “effectively second guess” a law firm's advice given to group members about a partial settlement.
Crown Resorts has reached agreement on a proposed penalty in AUSTRAC's case alleging “widespread and serious non-compliance” with anti-money laundering and counter terrorism financing laws, but the presiding judge says more information is needed for the court to fix a fine.
A judge aggrieved by the "plague" of competing class actions in the courts has temporarily stayed a second data breach class action against Medibank, and directed the health insurer to ask the privacy commissioner to drop the investigation of a third case.
A city council in the Hunter Valley region is set to appeal to the High Court a decision that found it was liable to pay a flight company over $3.6 million in damages for wasted expenditure after it repudiated a contract to lease land at the local airport.
Insurance Australia has agreed to pay a $40 million penalty in a case by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission alleging it short-changed NRMA customers a staggering $60 million in promised loyalty discounts.
A judge overseeing two 7-Eleven class actions has signed off on $2.25 million in costs incurred by the funder and lawyers in their pitched battle to win approval for the terms of a $98 million settlement, which included deductions of more than $44 million to cover commission and fees.
A judge has questioned whether recent changes to defamation law requiring courts to determine if a publication has caused serious harm ahead of trial are invalid because of possible inconsistency with the Federal Court’s case management rules.