News and resources

The Federal Court has ruled a major fund management corporation misled investors about its $1 billion ethical fund, which the company claimed was screened to ensure investments went into environmentally and socially beneficial projects. Fund manager accused of misleading investors over ethical fund It was the first major victory for the Australian Securities & Investments […]

The sudden emergence of ChatGPT and artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots as a feature of everyday life has opened up a new frontier in digital communication and content creation. However, the capacity of the technology to create false information raises the threat that those who disseminate such falsehoods can be sued for defamation. What is ChatGPT? […]

Electronic signing of documents grew enormously during the Covid lockdowns, but now questions have been raised about how an electronic signature, created with the press of a button, is properly witnessed under law. What is an electronic signature? Software such as DocuSign can be used to add a signature to a document electronically by pressing […]

An elderly man met a younger woman in 1998. The circumstances of that meeting were in dispute between the woman and the man’s son, who was the executor of the estate.

The woman claimed she had met the old man at a caravan park in Perisher, in the Snowy Mountains of NSW. However, the man’s son claimed his father told him she had responded to a newspaper advertisement seeking someone to provide domestic services in exchange for free accommodation.

The man invited the woman to come and live with him in Sydney to look after him.

Partial compulsory acquisition is where part of your property is acquired by the government for a public purpose. The law of both complete and partial compulsory acquisition comes under the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 No 22. How a partial compulsory acquisition is initiated Often, the first you hear about the government’s plans […]

The deceased and his first wife had two children.

The deceased’s first wife died in 1985, and in 1997 he married his second wife, S.

There were no children of this marriage, which ended when the deceased died in July 2003.

The deceased’s estate was estimated at almost $2,000,000, with the main asset being the matrimonial home.

The deceased left each of his daughters a legacy of $25,000 in his will. He left the residue of his estate to his second wife, S.

The will named S’s brother as executor.

At the time of his death, neither of the deceased’s children sought to challenge the will.

A 93-year-old man died on 22 March 2017.

In his lifetime, he had survived the Holocaust, emigrated to Australia and become a wealthy property developer.

He left behind a wife, two adult children and an Australian estate worth about $12.4 million.

By his will dated 15 May 2012, the deceased left the whole of his estate to his wife if she survived him. She was also appointed his executor.

If his wife did not survive him, then the deceased’s children and grandchildren would inherit his estate.

The deceased’s son was a businessman and operated a successful company.

The deceased also had a child who was biologically born a male. She identified as transgender and had been diagnosed with gender dysphoria.

The deceased and his wife found it difficult to accept their daughter’s identity. They were Orthodox Jews and had given their children a traditional Jewish family upbringing.

They became estranged from their daughter due to a variety of actions she took to distress and embarrass them.

However, the deceased continued to provide for his daughter financially until the day he died.

Publishers forced to check uncertain facts and seek legal advice As an Australian publisher and editor of a community newspaper since pre-internet times, like most other publishers, I have an increasing appreciation of the need for discretion when deciding what is printed. Many of my publisher colleagues have been and some still are proud advocates […]

[Editor’s note: Changes to online defamation laws in NSW and the ACT came into effect in July 2024. Please see New online defamation defence for publishers “innocently disseminating” third party comments.] A recent NSW Supreme Court judgement ruled major media outlets can be held responsible for defamatory social media posts made by members of the […]

On 25 June 2018, an employee commenced employment as a casual sales assistant with a large Australian retail chain.

The retailer had 1700 casual employees.

The employee was assigned to work irregular and differing hours. Her shifts were quite frequent though, typically being three or four shifts per week.

The employment contract provided no promise of continuing employment.

Work was allocated according to a monthly roster system and the employee indicated her availability to work for the month in advance.

After eight months, the retailer terminated the employee’s employment.

The employee then lodged a Fair Work Act application, claiming unfair dismissal and seeking reinstatement and compensation.

Under the Fair Work Act, a casual employee is only protected from unfair dismissal if:

• They have completed a period of employment of at least six months;
• Their employment was on a regular and systematic basis; and
• They had a reasonable expectation of continuing employment on that basis.

It was up to the Fair Work Commission to determine if the employee was eligible to bring a claim for unfair dismissal under the Fair Work Act.

Compulsory land acquisition is occurring at almost record levels across Sydney and regional areas in NSW, as governments decree that roads and infrastructure projects are the way out of economic doldrums. That’s great for construction firms, but for the people being forced out of their homes or having their investment property seized by the government, […]

A company introduced a biometric fingerprint scanning system as part of its new site attendance policy for all its employees. This measure was intended to provide security, safety and efficiency benefits for the company.

After the policy was announced during a floor meeting in October 2017, all company staff were directed to register their fingerprints over the following week. Once registered, employees would then check in and out of the company’s work sites by using scanners provided at the start and finish of each shift.