Most Recent
Baby food producer Bellamy’s has hit back at a $400,000 lawsuit by its former chief executive officer, saying she was sacked because of “poor financial performance” and not because she complained about sex discrimination.
Boutique law firm Barry Nilsson has snagged a Norton Rose Fulbright disputes partner who specialises in healthcare product liability class actions and his five-member team to join its Sydney office.
The legal industry has praised the historic appointment of Debra Mortimer as the first female Chief Justice of the Federal Court, noting her modern approach to managing cases and compassionate nature.
Transport for NSW has refused to hand over transactional documents related to its $16 billion Westconnex project in a class action over the alleged fraudulent acquisition of land to construct the tunnel in inner western Sydney.
Nine has won more time to file its evidence in advance of a six-week trial in defamation proceedings by surgeon Dr Munjed Al Muderis, despite a judge noting its “under-resourcing” of the matter, which the court heard could involve the broadcaster calling up to 40 witnesses.
Sydney law firm Baybridge Lawyers has lost a bid to block a rival firm that's located in the same office building from registering its ‘LawBridge’ trade mark.
Car dealers that brought a class action against General Motors over its decision to retire the Holden brand in Australia are refuting the car maker's claims that they did not mitigate their alleged losses, telling the court they signed 1-year support agreements which GM has yet to execute.
Star Entertainment can add new claims to a dispute over renovations at its Sydney casino, despite the fact that the defendant builder may be time barred from deflecting liability onto a subcontractor.
A law firm's debt for an unpaid bill is maintainable over files sought by a client in a saga dating back to 1993, despite the statute of limitations barring the firm from recovering its fees, a court has found.
Eleven current and former Star Entertainment executives have refuted ASIC's claims that they breached their duties in relation to the casino operator's lax money laundering compliance, with all but two denying they had a duty to ensure the company complied with its legal obligations.