The Commercial Bar Association of Victoria Inc. A0120851O
Owners Corporations are service providers for the purposes of the Equal Opportunity Act 2010 (EO Act) and therefore are required to make ‘reasonable adjustments’ to common areas for tenants and visitors with disabilities.
A company’s claims against its lawyers and non-executive chairperson after a failed attempt to list have been dismissed. The case offers a unique insight into a float which sunk and the gruelling hours worked by the company’s advisors, and stands as a testament to the judgment exercised by the company’s non-executive directors, who were placed in an invidious position.
The Supreme Court has emphasised the primacy of the building contract in granting a right to make a claim for final payment and confirmed the requirement for an adjudicator to be satisfied as to the ‘value’ of the works, notwithstanding that alleged defects that were subsequently identified existed at the time of a previous adjudication.
The Supreme Court of Victoria heard an application by a defendant for joinder of an alleged ‘concurrent wrongdoer’ in respect of claims made under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). After full and considered argument, the Court held that the claim for relief under the Corporations Act was not apportionable.
The National Energy Guarantee, Australia’s latest attempt to forge a coherent energy and emissions reduction policy, had been painstakingly negotiated by the Energy Security Board, through a wide range of interest groups. In its aftermath, how coherent policymaking can be co-ordinated in this fraught policy space remains as pressing a question as ever before.
The rules of most Victorian courts permit a party, in certain circumstances, to obtain discovery of material prior to commencing proceedings. Like many rule-based tests, there can be some confusion about the requirements as well as the discretionary factors involved in obtaining preliminary discovery. The Supreme Court in a recent appeal decision has shed some light.
Copyright – Infringement – Innocent infringement – Damages
Patents – infringement – claim construction – validity – novelty – obviousness – misleading or deceptive conduct – unjustified threats – costs
Trade marks – misleading or deceptive conduct – passing off – whether separate reputation in mark – differences in get up – unjustified threats – delay in bringing infringement action – whether claimant acted with due diligence
Patents – complete specification – best method – “performing the invention” – whether feature omitted from specific part of the best method known to the applicant for performing the invention
The Supreme Court of Victoria’s Arbitration List judge has confirmed that the appropriate standard of review by a court of an arbitral tribunal’s preliminary ruling on jurisdiction is a de novo review.
Mediation in sports disputes is growing in popularity. This article reviews the benefits offered by mediation and considers how sports disputes are different from ordinary commercial disputes. The author also offers some practical suggestions for mediators in sports disputes.
In Longley v Chief Executive, Department of Environment and Heritage Protection [2018] QCA 32, the Queensland Court of Appeal has clarified the ability of liquidators to disclaim onerous property, including obligations that arise in respect of that property under State environmental legislation.
The Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal by ASIC in proceedings brought against Peter Geary, a former officer of the Australian Wheat Board. The proceedings related to payments made by AWB to the Iraqi government in contravention of UN Resolutions.