ASIC’s case against the directors of Star Entertainment: directors’ duties through a modern lens

By: Yen Seah and Bella Marazita ASIC v Bekier (Liability Judgment) [2026] FCA 196 If you read nothing else, read this: The Federal Court’s 500-page liability judgment in ASIC v Bekier delivers a clear message for directors and officers: passive oversight is not enough. Executives must escalate serious risks – failing to act on red flags can breach […]

Another first for the Victorian GCO regime: Varying a Group Costs Order

By: Amanda Beattie, Jonathon Ferraro and Madeleine Wright Byrnes v Origin Energy (No 2) 2026 VSC 97 Another first for the Victorian GCO regime In a judgment delivered by Justice Waller on 11 March 2026, the Supreme Court of Victoria determined the first application to amend a Group Costs Order (GCO) pursuant to s 33ZDA(1) […]

Court of Appeal finds trusts are criminally liable under HSWA: What are the implications for insurers?

By: Misha Heneghan, Richie Flinn, Neil Beadle, Matt Hutcheson and the WK Statutory Liability team. RH and JY Trust v WorkSafe New Zealand [2026] NZCA 12 The Court of Appeal has, by majority found that a trust, distinct from the individual trustees, can be prosecuted under the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015. The […]

Federal or State? Understanding the Powers and Limits of Royal Commissions

By: Georgie Austin, Clare McNamara and Zoe Jones At a glance On 8 January 2026, the Governor-General issued draft Letters Patent establishing a Royal Commission on Antisemitism and Social Cohesion. The Commission has been tasked with addressing issues set out in its Terms of Reference, which are wide-ranging and encompass not only the terror event itself, […]

Landmark case found against the EPL claimant seeking $55M for the dismissal ruining his life

By: Rosemary Marando and Caitilin Watson Roohizadegan v Technology One Ltd (No 6) [2025] FCA 1619 At a glance The Federal Court has overturned a previous $5.2M ruling, dismissing Mr Roohizadegan’s General Protections claim after a six‑year litigation battle. The Court found the dismissal was due to performance, not disability, alleged workplace rights, or incentive entitlements. […]

NZIV v Kenny: The latest word from the Valuers Board of Appeal on conflict of interest

By: James Dymock and Victoria Waalkens Kenny v NZIV [2025] NZDC 17928 On 18 August 2025, the Valuers Board of Appeal (VBOA) allowed Mr Kenny’s appeal against the decision of the Valuers Registration Board (VRB), which found that he acted in a conflict of interest. A great result for Mr Kenny, who spent nearly six […]

South Australian court sets new benchmark for historical abuse damages

By: Cheryl Phillips, Matthew Elson and Beljana Dally B P v K R & ANOR [2025] SASC 58 At a glance The Supreme Court of South Australia awarded the applicant $400,000 in general damages arising from sexual abuse she suffered at the hands of two respondents during her formative and adult years. This matter will […]

Upward damages trend continues in sexual harassment case

By: Laura Gavan, Caitilin Watson and Ashi Muraleetharan Magar v Khan [2025] FCA 874 On 1 August 2025, the Federal Court of Australia (FCA) handed down judgment in Magar v Khan [2025] FCA 874, awarding the claimant $305,000. This amount comprised general, aggravated, and compensatory damages, including compensatory damages for past and future economic loss. […]

Davis v Wilson: The bar for successful shareholder class actions gets higher and higher

By: Amanda Beattie and Zoe Jones At a glance Following its decisions in other shareholder class actions late 2023 and 2024, the Federal Court has handed down yet another unfavourable decision for shareholders (Davis v Wilson [2025] FCA 108). The claim alleged that Quintis’ CEO, Frank Wilson, and its auditor, Ernst & Young, engaged in […]

Successful ‘declassing’ application in Waller Legal class action: Implications for institutional defendants?

By: Amanda Beattie, Zoe Jones and Nick Salagaras At a glance The Supreme Court of Victoria has granted an application made by a defendant (Waller Legal) for a claim to no longer proceed as a group proceeding. The claim made by the lead plaintiff, Jane Jones (a pseudonym) alleged that Waller Legal breached its duty […]