Cases - Level Twenty Seven Chambers

Top

All Cases

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v eHarmony, Inc [2026] FCA 1208

25-8-26 / Michael Hodge KC — Competition & Consumer

Michael Hodge KC (leading Mr G Kozminsky) represented the respondent, instructed by Baker McKenzie. The Applicant, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, commenced proceedings in the Federal Court, alleging that the Respondent, eHarmony, had contravened various provisions of the Australian Consumer Law (ACL), contained in Schedule 2 of the Competition…

Pat Nolan Butchery Pty Ltd & Ors v Department of Transport and Main Roads [2026] QLC 13

19-8-26 / Rob Anderson KC, John Ware — Land Law & Property

Rob Anderson KC and John Ware appeared for the applicants. This proceeding concerned an application to dismiss a compensation claim arising from the resumption of land, where the applicants asserted that a licence to use a flood evacuation track constituted an interest in land giving rise to compensation rights under…

M Resources Trading Pty Ltd v Australian Pacific Coal Ltd [2026] QCA 150

18-8-26 / Damian Clothier KC, Jonathan Hohl — Corporate Insolvency & Bankruptcy

Damian Clothier KC And Jonathan Hohl appeared for the appellant, instructed by Corrs Chambers Westgarth. The appellant appealed against a decision setting aside its statutory demand for unpaid fees under a 2024 deed between it and the respondent. At first instance, the primary judge found that there was a genuine…

Laureti v Commissioner of Taxation [2026] FCA 1086

10-8-26 / Mark Robertson KC — Tax

Mark Robertson KC (leading John Fickling and Greg Antipas) appeared for the applicant, instructed by N. Panos & Associates. By way of summary, the applicant sought summary judgment against the Commissioner of Taxation in an appeal from an objection decision. The Court dismissed the application and allowed the Commissioner to…

MG Homes Pty Ltd v Grocorp Homes Pty Ltd [2026] FCA 1090

6-8-26 / Anthony Messina — Intellectual Property

Anthony Messina represented the first respondent/first cross claimant, instructed by Irish Bentley Lawyers. By interlocutory application, the applicants sought an interim freezing order over sale proceeds obtained by the first and second respondents from lot sales in a Pimpama development. The first respondent contended that the applicants had not established…