Most Recent
Some of Australia's biggest law firms were targeted by lawsuits in 2022, facing allegations of negligence or bad advice from clients, or else accused by their own partners of misconduct.
Editors and journalists from Australia’s largest news organisations have protested recent changes to the Federal Court Rules that restrict the public’s access to documents filed with the court, calling it a “full-frontal assault” on open justice.
A judge who previously acted for a United Petroleum Group company in a “highly acrimonious” case eight years ago has refused to recuse herself from adjudicating a new dispute involving a related company.
A prominent Melbourne lawyer and his wife have been restrained from acting in a property dispute, after a judge found they misled the court and facilitated a false settlement in favour of their clients.
The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal has found a Melbourne barrister guilty of professional misconduct for making an unsubstantiated allegation of fraud in a costs dispute six years ago.
A lawyer who was found guilty of professional misconduct for failing to pay $23,000 in fees to senior counsel has won a bid to access a report relating to the silk’s health on appeal.
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has taken wealth guru Dominique Grubisa and her business DG Institute to court for allegedly misleading students of their real estate investing and wealth management programs.
The operator of the Royal Perth Hospital has brought legal action against Griffith Hack alleging the law firm contributed to the "dishonest and fraudulent design" of a leading researcher to transfer the intellectual property rights to a stem cell manufacturing method developed inhouse.
A personal injury law firm has been ordered to itemise a "very substantial" $470,000 bill more then four years after it was rendered to a client, who was asked by the firm's in-house barrister to sign a backdated costs disclosure agreement.
A solicitor of a national law firm has been reprimanded after falsely representing that the firm acted for her partner in a property dispute over $1,000.