In Devren Pty Ltd v Old Coach Developments Pty Ltd and Ors [2015] QSC 53, funds payable to a company were paid to other entities in accordance with the direction ...
In Devren Pty Ltd v Old Coach Developments Pty Ltd and Ors [2015] QSC 53, funds payable to a company were paid to other entities in accordance with the direction of Mr Clair, the purported managing director of the company.
In Allco Funds Management Limited v Trust Co (Re Services) Ltd [2014] NSWSC 1251, an inter-company loan transaction was challenged by a receiver appointed by the secured creditor to one of the companies.
If you haven’t reviewed your privacy policy in the last 12 months, now is the time act or you might face significant penalties.
The ACCC has taken action after completing an investigation into Kia Motors’ capped price servicing advertisements.
Businesses have until next Wednesday 12 March to comply with two new sets of privacy obligations under the Privacy Amendment (Enhancing Privacy Protection) Act 2012 (Cth).
Businesses that deal with an individual’s personal information in any way must take steps to deal with the new privacy amendments or risk penalties of up to $1.7 million for breaches by corporations and up to $340,000 for breaches by individuals.
Recent proceedings brought against appliance giant Fisher & Paykel by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) offer businesses a timely reminder to consider whether their communications around extended warranties are in compliance with the policies enshrined in the Australian Consumer Law (ACL).
On 26 October 2013, the Queensland Parliament passed the Directors’ Liability Reform Amendment Act to give effect to its promise to introduce legislation to reduce the liability of directors and officers in Queensland. The Act took effect on 1 November 2013.
The legal definition of what constitutes a charity has developed over the past 400 years, dating back to the Charitable Uses Act 1601, commonly known as the Statute of Elizabeth.
A recent decision by the NSW Court of Appeal concerning parties making claims against directors and officers provides some certainty for directors and insurers with regard to the proceeds of D&O policies.
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) and Federal Court have recently demonstrated that they will take a strong stance against businesses that use unfair terms in their standard form consumer contracts.
An earlier judgment that suggested that directors may be unable to rely on Directors’ and Officers’ (D&O) liability insurance to fund defence costs has been reversed. The overturned decision had effectively prevented directors accessing a single policy, intended to cover both defence costs and claims for damages, where a civil