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 117

How do investors protect their investment in a property development joint venture?
  • Cordato Partners
  • Australia
  • June 20 2017

Many land owners who want to develop their property run out of money before their property development project is realised. Some land owners find an

Court Of Appeal Clarifies Restrictions in Responsible Entity Voting
  • Corrs Chambers Westgarth
  • Australia
  • July 28 2016

Most of the time, investors don’t need to think too heavily about the difference between investments in listed shares or units. Every now and then

Class actions - can investors now sue without proving direct reliance?
  • McCullough Robertson
  • Australia
  • May 10 2016

The NSW Supreme Court recently handed down its decision in Re HIH Insurance Limited (In Liq). This long-running saga began with the collapse 15

Australian Court allows indirect causation for shareholder claims
  • King & Wood Mallesons
  • Australia
  • April 26 2016

An investor buys shares in a listed company on market. They do so without reading the company's recently released accounts or undertaking any other

Social Benefit Bonds
  • Gadens
  • Australia
  • February 2 2016

In 2013 the New South Wales Government established Australia's first social benefit bond pilot. Social benefit bonds are a financial instrument that

Drag along gone wrong?
  • Rockwell Olivier
  • Australia
  • July 25 2013

Shareholders’ agreements commonly include what are known as “drag along” provisions. Typically the drag along clause enables a majority shareholder to

HIH offers yet another lesson for investors - this time on the dangers of convertible notes
  • Corrs Chambers Westgarth
  • Australia
  • April 17 2013

A Supreme Court decision has delivered a hefty blow to holders of HIH Holdings (NZ) convertible notes leaving them with little hope of recovering any

PI claim(s) by a financial planner, aggregation, broker’s negligence and loss of a chance in one
  • King & Wood Mallesons
  • Australia
  • June 27 2011

Prosperity Advisers Ltd v Secure Enterprises Pty Ltd TAs Strathearn Insurance Brokers Pty Ltd 2011 NSWSC 35 illustrates aggregation issues in a professional indemnity claim by a financial planner, and how the relevant facts and precise words of the policy are always determinative of whether claims may be aggregated so a single deductible (rather than multiple deductibles) applies.

The last days of Part 3A - and NSW planning laws to be reviewed
  • Clayton Utz
  • Australia
  • April 5 2011

No more applications for developments will be accepted under Part 3A of NSW's Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, and Part 3A will be repealed when Parliament returns, fulfilling an election promise by the incoming Premier Barry O'Farrell.

The James Hardie decision: implications for general counsel
  • Hall & Wilcox
  • Australia
  • August 25 2009

The recent New South Wales Supreme Court decision of Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) v Macdonald (No 11) 2009 NSWSC 287 (commonly referred to as the James Hardie decision) serves as a dramatic reminder of the importance of directors' duties in the operation of a board of directors.