Law Firms

A Sydney developer has been slapped with orders preventing it from selling the ‘Honeycomb Terraces’ in order to preserve the funds available to the owners corporation, which is seeking damages over defects at the allegedly contaminated site.

An adjudicator’s finding that it had no jurisdiction to rule on a payment claim in a dispute over a Sydney development was a binding determination under SOPA, an appeals court has said in upholding a decision that a builder’s pursuit of a second, favourable adjudication was an abuse of process.

Former senator Linda Reynolds' decision to accept the Commonwealth's help in picking up her legal tab in litigation by staffer Brittany Higgins came with the condition that the government might take control of her defence, a court has been told.

A solar company's claims against 12 Mazars' partners have been dismissed from a $9.3 million embezzlement lawsuit, after a judge found the allegations had no prospects of success.

Macquarie is fighting a bid to amend a class action over an alleged misleading prospectus for Nuix’s $1.8 billion IPO only months out from trial, calling the changes “unclear and unfair”. 

A class action representing KFC workers who were denied rest breaks has reached a settlement with the bulk of the fast food chain's franchisees targeted in the case.

Aristocrat has fended off the Commissioner of Patents' challenge to a finding that its Lightning Link poker machine is capable of being patented, with the High Court declining to weigh in on the patent for a second time. 

Actress Rebel Wilson has fired lawyers who were representing her in NSW Supreme Court and Federal Court defamation proceedings linked to her film 'The Deb'.

Dexus has halved the number of documents it claims are shielded by legal privilege from production to fellow owners of airport operator APAC ahead of trial over an alleged breach of a shareholder deed, a court heard Monday.

The High Court has declined to grant special leave to a prefab home builder that was hit with $500,000 in damages for engaging in misleading and deceptive conduct by convincing a couple to vary their contract to allow the use of cladding they had previously rejected.