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.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 187

Negotiated outcomes with the ACCC: is the High Court decision of Barbaro the end of the world as regulators and those negotiating with them know it?
  • McInnes Wilson Lawyers
  • Australia
  • May 25 2015

As a result of a High Court decision, Barbaro v The Queen, courts are not required to adopt, as the appropriate sentence for admitted offences, any


Not all that glitters is golden: compulsory acquisition of land compensation
  • McInnes Wilson Lawyers
  • Australia
  • April 29 2015

Generally, each State and Territory in Australia has legislation providing for the compulsory acquisition of land. In Queensland, this is dealt with


Court mandates protection of investors
  • McInnes Wilson Lawyers
  • Australia
  • April 29 2015

The Federal Court in the case of Australian Securities and Investments Commission v ActiveSuper Pty Ltd (in liq) 2015 FCA 342 considered alleged


Insolvent trading: directors don’t always know best
  • McInnes Wilson Lawyers
  • Australia
  • April 29 2015

Directors of an insolvent company face a strict duty not to allow their company to trade whilst insolvent. Whilst there are exceptions and defences


The story of blow dry bar: no fairy tale ending for Castle Hill franchise
  • McInnes Wilson Lawyers
  • Australia
  • April 23 2015

Misleading and deceptive conduct remains one of the most frequent allegations arising in franchise disputes. The recent decision of Carazi Pty Ltd v


A timely reminder franchisors ‘intentional recklessness’ leads to pecuniary penalties of $500,000
  • McInnes Wilson Lawyers
  • Australia
  • March 26 2015

With the recent amendment of the Franchising Code, the case of Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v South East Melbourne Cleaning Pty Ltd


A timely reminder franchisors ‘intentional recklessness’ leads to pecuniary penalties
  • McInnes Wilson Lawyers
  • Australia
  • March 18 2015

With the recent amendment of the Franchising Code, the case of Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v South East Melbourne Cleaning Pty Ltd


What applies and when? Unraveling the application of the amendments to the Franchising Code
  • McInnes Wilson Lawyers
  • Australia
  • February 27 2015

After much anticipation the new Franchising Code of Conduct (Code) came into effect from 1 January 2015. However, the application of the Code is not


Liquidators’ obtaining a non-publication order
  • McInnes Wilson Lawyers
  • Australia
  • February 26 2015

There are circumstances where a liquidator may approach the Court concerned that their position in future proceedings may be weakened if the matters


Property purchased with after-acquired income is not after-acquired property
  • McInnes Wilson Lawyers
  • Australia
  • February 26 2015

Property acquired by a bankrupt after the date of bankruptcy becomes property that is divisible amongst the bankrupts' creditors. However, case law