Ergon Energy Queensland Pty Ltd v Australian Energy Regulator [2025] FCA 541
27-5-25 / Salwa Marsh — Competition & Consumer
Salwa Marsh (led by Mr J Arnott SC and with Ms N Wootton for written submissions) represented the respondent, instructed by Baker McKenzie. The case concerned the validity of a notice to produce documents and information issued to the applicant by the respondent, pursuant to s 206 of the National…
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Productivity Partners Pty Ltd (trading as Captain Cook College) (in administration) (no 6) [2025] FCA 542
27-5-25 / Michael Hodge KC — Competition & Consumer
Michael Hodge KC (and A S Vial) represented the fourth respondent, instructed by HWL Ebsworth Lawyers. Michael Hodge KC and (Alexander Vial) appeared for the fourth respondent, Blake Wills, instructed by HWL Ebsworth Lawyers. In ACCC v Productivity Partners Pty Ltd (No 3) [2021] FCA 737, Stewart J found that…
Kristi Riedel represented the respondent, Chief Executive Officer, Civil Aviation Saftey Authority. This application concerned a review by the Administrative Review Tribunal of a Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) decision, where the Applicant was refused a medical certificate. The principal issue considered by the Tribunal was whether issuing a medical certificate…
Clarke Energy (Australia) Pty Ltd v Power Generation Corporation (Trading as Territory Generation) [No 2] [2025] QSC 111
20-5-25 / Michael Trim — Arbitration
Michael Trim (led by A Wyvill SC and instructed by MinterEllison) appeared for the first respondent, Power Generation Corporation (trading as Territory Generation). The primary issue concerned the provision of indemnity costs, where the applicant had unsuccessfully applied to set aside an arbitral award under the Commercial Arbitration Act 2010…
Veterinary Surgeons Board of Queensland v Hitchcock [2025] QCAT 200
19-5-25 / Oliver Cook — Professional Discipline & Regulatory
Oliver Cook represented the respondent, instructed by Colin Biggers & Paisley. The central issue concerned whether the respondent acted negligently in his practice as a veterinarian, particularly in his alleged failure to maintain proper records. The Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal dismissed the disciplinary proceedings against the respondent.
