Exploring the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on law and jurisprudence.
This is the second of two articles recapping two key concepts of contract law which may be relevant in the face of the ongoing coronavirus pandemic: the force majeure clause, and the common law doctrine of frustration.
This is the first of two articles recapping two key concepts of contract law which may be relevant in the face of the ongoing coronavirus pandemic: the force majeure clause, and the common law doctrine of frustration.
The Treasury Laws Amendment (Combating Illegal Phoenixing) Act 2020 (Cth) received Royal Assent on 17 February 2020. A number of important measures targeted at ‘phoenix activity’ have now taken effect, including the duty imposed on company officers to prevent ‘creditor-defeating dispositions’.
Application for interlocutory injunction – restraint of trade – trade mark infringement
Patent validity – manner of manufacture – whether methods and systems for providing and receiving information for risk management in the field are patentable
Patent infringement and validity – failure of experimental proof to establish infringement – lack of best method – refusal to amend patent to address lack of best method
Practice and procedure – mandatory interlocutory injunction – no evidence of quantifiable loss – little inconvenience to respondent
The High Court has unanimously held that property held by a bankrupt on trust for third parties in which property the bankrupt had a beneficial interest vested in the trustee in bankruptcy.
This note examines current issues in the application of competition law to non-horizontal mergers, with particular reference to the recent decision of the Federal Court in the Pacific National case, and the arguments raised in the appeal to the Full Court.
For ACL buffs, Treasury’s current Consultation Regulation Impact Statement is a doozy. Reading between the lines, it seems to suggest that unfair contract terms may soon be outlawed once and for all.
The Court of Appeal recently decided a case about the interpretation of the moratorium on petroleum exploration under the Petroleum Act 1998 (Vic).
The Supreme Court of Victoria has held that payment claims under the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 2002 (Vic) served before a “reference date” are invalid, notwithstanding a contractual deeming provision to the contrary.
An item of work in a payment claim which has not been paid may be claimed again and again as a component of successive payment claims provided the payment claim itself is valid. The limitation period in s 14(4)(b) of the Security of Payment Act only applies to the payment claim.