Lack of VCAT resourcing no longer grounds for resisting a stay
The state of VCAT’s resourcing has changed since 2021 and can no longer be relied on as a basis to resist a stay under s 57 of the Domestic Building Contracts Act 1995 (Vic).
The Commercial Bar Association of Victoria Inc. A0120851O
The state of VCAT’s resourcing has changed since 2021 and can no longer be relied on as a basis to resist a stay under s 57 of the Domestic Building Contracts Act 1995 (Vic).
The recent decision of Justice Jackman in ASIC v Auto & General Insurance Company Limited was the first judicial consideration of the unfair contract terms regime under the ASIC Act in relation to an insurance contract. The impugned notification clause was found not to contravene two out of three limbs of s 12BG.
A recent decision of the Federal Court of Australia has confirmed the Court’s power to make an order suspending limitation periods applicable to claims against a deregistered company when ordering its reinstatement under s 601AH of the Corporations Act (the Act).
In Q St Kilda Tenancy Pty Ltd v Bortnik [2023] VCAT 1384 the Tribunal considered whether a landlord who sought to apply rent increases that it had not previously charged had either waived its right to retrospectively seek restitution or was otherwise estopped from applying the old increases.
The Federal Court of Australia (Jackman J) relieved the defendant from pecuniary penalties for contraventions of the Corporations Act for issuing a crypto-asset yield product without an Australian financial services licence and without having registered it as a managed investment scheme.
Sub-elite athletes may not need to resort to full scale litigation in the Supreme Court to challenge a denial of procedural fairness in a sporting body’s disciplinary process. Depending on the circumstances, athletes may seek relief in the Magistrates’ Court, and this may be a more cost effective option.
With most of the usual factors being relatively equal; a practitioner’s track record of cooperation, resolution of issues through negotiation and compliance with CPA obligations in group proceedings becomes the material factor in determining competing carriage applications.
Court determination of competing carriage and GCO applications – importance of legal practitioner class action experience and GCO proposal – importance of detailed expert evidence regarding financial capacity to conduct litigation and meet costs orders
Tom Curran of the Sydney Sixers was banned for 4 matches for intimidating an umpire under the Cricket Australia Code of Conduct. Curran appealed the decision on the basis that he did not have any intention to intimidate. The appeal was dismissed.
A number of proceedings flowing from the May 2021 Callide C explosion – insolvency, insurance and energy market regulation – have now made their way into court. This article provides an overview of recent developments in these proceedings.
This case note discusses the recent decision of the Honourable Justice Jackman in ASIC v Zurich Australia Limited, which considered the content of the statutory duty of utmost good faith.
The High Court has held that where parties have agreed to arbitrate any dispute, and the International Arbitration Act applies, even a real risk (or prima facie case) that the arbitration agreement is null and void will not prevent the stay of any court proceedings and referral of the matter to arbitration.
Summary judgment for a statutory debt claim under security of payment legislation was refused because there was an arguable defence of misleading or deceptive conduct that was not a defence arising “under the construction contract”.
The New South Wales Court of Appeal, in a split decision, has allowed an appeal against a judgment granting equitable set-off. In overturning the trial judge’s decision, the Court also considered the scope and application of the so-called Brickenden principle, which prohibits speculation by a defaulting fiduciary as to what would have happened had there been no default
The issue of whether an interest rate clause in a loan agreement which contained the familiar structure where the high rate applies if the loan is in default otherwise the lower rate applies was a penalty was considered by Her Honour Justice Henry in Commercial N Pty Limited v Huang & Ors [2024] NSWSC 23.