Our legal experts will keep you up to date on all relevant and current developments.

Sep 17, 2013 3:46:00 PM / by Rachael Sutton posted in Workplace Relations

It is no longer certain that an employee injured on a journey between home and work will receive  worker’s compensation benefits.

Quite frequently business owners who have decided to enter into various arrangements for the distribution or licensing of their goods or services discover that the agreement reached is in law a “franchise agreement” and that they have unwittingly become a franchisor subject to additional regulation and obligations. If an agreement is a “franchise agreement” then there are certain legal requirements including mandatory disclosure prior to the grant of the franchise, procedures for transfer and termination and resolution of disputes.

Sep 9, 2013 11:37:00 AM / by Jonathan Casson posted in Business Corporate & Commercial

What must you do when a contract requires you to use “best endeavours”, “reasonable endeavours” or “all reasonable endeavours”?  Are your contractual obligations for “best endeavours” or “best reasonable endeavours” higher than those for “reasonable endeavours”?

This is a vexed question and one that Courts over the world have dealt with.  The Australian position is more flexible than the position in the UK.  The 2012 decision in Australia has watered down the strict distinctions between “best endeavours”, “best reasonable endeavours” and “reasonable endeavours”.  Recommendations on how our clients should deal with these vagaries in order to protect their position are addressed at the end of this article.

Sep 9, 2013 11:36:00 AM / by Tal Williams posted in Business Corporate & Commercial

A US Judge has found that organisations who use images posted on Twitter for commercial purposes will infringe the copyright of the owner of those photographs.

Aug 28, 2013 12:38:00 PM / by Alison Choy Flannigan posted in Health, Aged Care & Life Sciences

Our health, aged care and life sciences team discuss a range of topical health, life sciences, medico-legal, aged care and retirement living, social media, privacy, franchising and employment issues. To read the latest copy of the Health Law Bulletin, click here.


When the word franchising is mentioned, most readers of the Health Law Bulletin think of fast food chains, home maintenance and retailing. What does it have to do with health, aged care and community services? 

Aug 14, 2013 11:32:00 AM / by Rachael Sutton posted in Workplace Relations

Amendments to the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (Fair Work Act) give the Fair Work Commission jurisdiction over complaints of bullying in workplaces covered by the Fair Work Act. Previously, bullying could only be raised as an example of conduct that may breach adverse action provisions of the Fair Work Act or unfair dismissal laws. The amendments commence on 1 January 2014, six months later than originally proposed. Click here to read more.

Aug 14, 2013 11:01:00 AM / by Alison Choy Flannigan posted in Health, Aged Care & Life Sciences

Hospital operators, invest in expensive medical equipment, such as linear accelerators. The recent case of Re Cancer Care Institute of Australia Pty Limited [2013] NSWSC 37 highlights the issue of protecting ownership in medical equipment.

NEWS - Holman Webb appointed to the Commonwealth preapproved Law Firms List

Making further external recognition of Holman Webb’s legal expertise, we are pleased to advise of our recent inclusion in the Commonwealth Government’s Legal Services Multi-User List. All Commonwealth Government departments and agencies (other than Commonwealth companies and government business enterprises) are required to use the law firms included on this list for their external legal services from 1 July 2013.

Jul 19, 2013 11:07:00 AM / by John Van de Poll posted in Insurance

Summary of article by UK legal academic Gerald Swaby entitled “Blurring distinctions: Should innocent insureds be tarred with the same brush as their fraudulent agents? (Insurance Law Journal April 2013 Vol 24 No. 1).

A husband and wife go through an acrimonious separation. One spouse acts violently against the other by burning the house down. Should the victim forfeit his/her insurance claim?

In his recent article, Gerald Swaby argues that the victim should not forfeit her claim in this situation. There have been a number of cases, where the husband and wife hold a joint policy and one party (frequently, the husband) commits a fraudulent act. The wife then makes a claim on the insurance policy. This begs the question – should she be indemnified either in full, or in part, under the policy?

Recent Posts

1.. 32


34 ..36

Who We Are


What We Do