Lawyerly’s Litigation Firms of 2019 racked up multiple wins last year in high-stakes litigation against formidable opponents, including the country’s top regulators.
Running a law firm is not without risk, chief among them staring down a lawsuit by a client, an ex-partner or employee, even a rival firm. Last year, Australian firms faced numerous actions alleging everything from sex discrimination to negligence.
The liquidators of Melbourne-based forex trader Berndale Capital have filed examination proceedings in the Federal Court seeking to question the company’s former CEO and its other directors.
The property developers behind two Canberra apartment complexes have been dealt a partial loss in two class actions against them, with a judge finding the developers misled the lead applicants about the GST payable on their units but that only some of them were entitled to compensation or restitution.
A six-week trial scheduled for February in a criminal cartel case against mobile equipment provider Country Care Group could be vacated a second time as lawyers for the defendants seek to appeal the judge’s planned directions to a jury in the groundbreaking case.
An appeals court has slashed a $450,000 judgment against law firm HWL Ebsworth to $127,000, after finding a former partner who sued the firm for unfair dismissal had not lost the opportunity to seek other employment.
Melbourne-based fintech company ISignthis is taking the Australian Stock Exchange to court for refusing to lift the suspension of its shares and allegedly digging for confidential information to “find a problem”.
The construction company behind Sydney’s Opal Tower has filed a cross claim seeking $30 million from structural architect WSP Structures over its allegedly faulty building design.
Troubled retail technology firm Irexchange is accused of misleading shareholders through three different capital raising offers, according to a new Federal Court case brought by investors who sunk over $4.5 million into the company.
HWL Ebsworth claims it was justified in firing a former partner for being dishonest about why he printed out confidential material, as the firm challenges a $450,000 unfair dismissal judgment.