We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 67

Some clarity on the extent of the implied duty to exercise a contractual discretion in good faith: Caswell v SonyATV Music Publishing (Australia) Pty LTD 2014 NSWSC 841

  • Gilbert + Tobin
  • -
  • Australia
  • -
  • August 26 2014

This case provides some useful clarification of the extent of the implied duty to exercise a contractual discretion in good faith. The New South

Supreme Court of Victoria considers grounds for oppressive conduct in Grego v Copeland & Ors

  • Gilbert + Tobin
  • -
  • Australia
  • -
  • December 14 2011

This case concerned proceedings brought by Mr Frank Grego, a shareholder of Jimmi Dexta Pty Ltd (Jimmi Dexta), against the company's other shareholders, alleging oppressive conduct under s232 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth

Who can get damages under section 233 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)? LPD Holdings (Aust) Pty Ltd v Phillips, Hickey and Toigo & Anor

  • Gilbert + Tobin
  • -
  • Australia
  • -
  • October 24 2013

This case illustrates that while it is open for shareholders to seek compensation for oppressive or unfair conduct under section 233 of the

When will a contract by frustrated for illegality?: PT Arutmin Indonesia v PT Thiess Contractors Indonesia 2013 QSC 332

  • Gilbert + Tobin
  • -
  • Australia
  • -
  • February 25 2014

The Supreme Court of Queensland refused to find that changes in the law which affected a company's ability to engage a contractor or changes to the

Federal Court of Australia considers the effect of an entire agreement clause on oral evidence in Prosperity Group International Pty Ltd v Queensland Communication Company Pty Ltd (No 3)

  • Gilbert + Tobin
  • -
  • Australia
  • -
  • December 14 2011

This case concerned several contracts where Clear Telecoms (Aust) Pty Ltd, Australian Equipment Rentals Pty Ltd and Quick Fund (Australia) Pty Ltd (the Respondents) had agreed to provide telecommunications services to Prosperity Group International Pty Ltd and Worldnet Corporation Limited Pty Ltd (the Applicants

When will actual receipt of a notice trump deemed receipt? APN Funds v Australia Property & Anor

  • Gilbert + Tobin
  • -
  • Australia
  • -
  • December 18 2013

The Supreme Court of Victoria-Court of Appeal found that a typical deemed receipt of notices provision in a Unit Subscription and Put Option Deed

Supreme Court of New South Wales finds that nominal compensation for a shareholder forced to transfer its shares due to a failure to contribute further funding constitutes a penalty in In the matter of Pioneer Energy Holdings Pty Ltd

  • Gilbert + Tobin
  • -
  • Australia
  • -
  • September 19 2013

The Court applied the plain language and the commercial imperatives of the parties to interpret the terms of a shareholders agreement to require a

Supreme Court of Victoria considers whether a shareholders agreement was effective as a resolution to amend a constitution in Re Rectron Electronics Pty Ltd

  • Gilbert + Tobin
  • -
  • Australia
  • -
  • September 19 2013

The Supreme Court of Victoria upheld the resolutions passed at a directors' meeting conducted on the footpath outside the company's office after the

Creditors’ schemes in the hot seat: the Nine Creditors’ Scheme of Arrangement

  • Gilbert + Tobin
  • -
  • Australia
  • -
  • February 28 2013

On 29 January 2013, the Federal Court of Australia made orders approving the creditors’ scheme of arrangement between Nine Entertainment Group Pty

Can a party cash in an unconditional performance guarantee pending the resolution of a dispute?: Walton Construction Pty Ltd v Pines Living Pty Ltd 2013 ACTSC 237

  • Gilbert + Tobin
  • -
  • Australia
  • -
  • February 25 2014

The unconditional nature of a bank guarantee does not necessarily imply an unconditional entitlement to cash in the guarantee in the absence of an