27 May 2004
Welcome to the May edition of Clayton Utz Litigation and Dispute Resolution Insights. In this edition we look at two problems in assessing damages under the Trade Practices Act: establishing the link between the misleading conduct and the alleged loss, and what are the damages meant to compensate?
We'll also look at the Australian implications of two English developments. First, can a director be obliged to disclose his or her own misconduct to the company which is a victim of it? Secondly, the UK civil procedural reforms have "overriding objectives" - how do they affect us?
By Kym Fraser and Fiona Dea.
By Dean Jordan and Fiona Boyce.
By David Harland.
A recent Federal Court decision illustrates how showing a causal link between misleading conduct and the loss alleged is crucial in an action for damages, as David Harland explains.
By David Harland, Ainslee Cox and Nicole McKinnon.