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.
Lexology logo
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-7 of 7

Supreme Court of Canada affirms dismissal of Danier Leather shareholder class action

  • Norton Rose Canada LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • October 19 2007

On October 12, 2007 the Supreme Court of Canada issued its decision in the shareholder class action suit Kerr v. Danier Leather Inc

ASIC fails to build case against Fortescue CEO

  • Norton Rose LLP
  • -
  • Australia
  • -
  • July 29 2010

The corporate regulator's recent track record in relation to the prosecution of directors continued on 23 December 2009 when Justice Gilmour of the Federal Court handed down judgment in Australian Securities & Investments Commission v Fortescue Metals Group Ltd

The James Hardie decision: Australian Securities & Investments Commission v MacDonald

  • Norton Rose LLP
  • -
  • Australia
  • -
  • July 29 2010

The Australian Securities & Investments Commission (ASIC) commenced civil proceedings in the Supreme Court of NSW against James Hardie Industries Limited (JHIL), James Hardie Industries NV (JHINV), seven former non-executive directors and three former executives of JHIL for breaches of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (the Act) in relation to the preparation and approval of public statements

The James Hardie decision

  • Norton Rose LLP
  • -
  • Australia
  • -
  • August 31 2009

The Australian Securities & Investments Commission (ASIC) commenced civil proceedings in the Supreme Court of NSW against James Hardie Industries Limited (JHIL), James Hardie Industries NV (JHINV), seven former non-executive directors and three former executives of JHIL for breaches of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Act) in relation to the preparation and approval of public statements

Corporate regulator fails against One.Tel directors

  • Norton Rose LLP
  • -
  • Australia
  • -
  • July 29 2010

On 18 November 2009, Justice Austin of the New South Wales Supreme Court ruled in favour of two former directors of failed telecommunications company One.Tel, following an extended trial that lasted for more than 200 days of hearing

The James Hardie decisions: Australian Securities & Investments Commission v Hellicar & Ors 2012 HCA 17; Shafron v Australian Securities & Investments Commission 2012 HCA 18

  • Norton Rose LLP
  • -
  • Australia
  • -
  • May 4 2012

The full bench of the High Court of Australia yesterday overturned the NSW Court of Appeal Decisions in Morley v Australian Securities and Investments Commission (No 2) and Shafron v Australian Securities and Investments Commission (No2) holding that seven non-executive directors and the company secretarygeneral counsel of James Hardie Industries Ltd (JHIL) breached their duties as directors or officers of the company in relation to the release of a misleading announcement to the Australian Stock Exchange (ASX

The James Hardie decisions

  • Norton Rose Australia
  • -
  • Australia
  • -
  • June 8 2012

The full bench of the High Court of Australia yesterday overturned the NSW Court of Appeal Decisions in Morley v Australian Securities and Investments Commission (No 2) and Shafron v Australian Securities and Investments Commission (No2) holding that seven non-executive directors and the company secretarygeneral counsel of James Hardie Industries Ltd (JHIL) breached their duties as directors or officers of the company in relation to the release of a misleading announcement to the Australian Stock Exchange (ASX