Category Archive: Property

CFMEU says thousands of Australian buildings are clad in non-conforming cladding

The CFMEU has made explosive comments at a recent hearing of the senate inquiry into non-conforming building products. In his testimony earlier this month, Travis Wacey of the CFMEU alleged that thousands of Australian buildings may be clad in non-conforming cladding, which may pose a fire risk. The contentious use of cladding, which is alleged …

Continue reading »

Senate Inquiry into ‘non-confirming’ building products is wrapping up

On 23 June 2015, the Senate commenced a wide-ranging an inquiry into the use of ‘non-conforming’ building products (being products and materials that do not meet required standards). The inquiry was launched following a 2014 fire in a Victorian apartment complex involving the use of aluminium composite panelling. The due date for reporting has been …

Continue reading »

The Victorian Building Authority fires up for further audits

Following the Lacrosse fire in Melbourne’s Docklands in late 2014, the Victorian Building Authority (VBA) conducted an audit of non-compliant wall cladding systems of high rise buildings in inner city Melbourne. By way of background, the Lacrosse building was clad in aluminium composite panelling, and it is alleged that the panelling (with a combustible core) …

Continue reading »

Insurance Review May 2016

Welcome to Insurance Review May 2016, DLA Piper’s publication dedicated to the insurance industry. In this edition we report on developments across the insurance industry, including the impact of the AEC and other regulatory developments. We also report on the latest cases in many classes of business, including D&O, cyber, privacy, fintech, construction, medical indemnity, …

Continue reading »

‘An undesirable situation’ – Victorian Court of Appeal decision in Metricon v Softley

Handed down this week, Metricon Homes Pty Ltd v Softley ([2016] VSCA 60) is a decision of the Victorian Court of Appeal relating to the 2014 Tribunal decision of Vice President Judge McNamara and Member Cameron ([2014] VCAT 1502). Parties seeking leave to appeal a decision of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (Tribunal) will …

Continue reading »

Queensland court declares apportionable claim

The Supreme Court of Queensland decision of Douglas J in The Avenues Tavern (Townsville) v K P Architects [2015] QSC 182 (2012/12262) is a recent example as to the operation of the Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld) (CLA) and how pleading a party as a concurrent wrongdoer should work in practice. The plaintiff was the …

Continue reading »

Joinder of defendants in apportionable claims: a question of justice

A recent Western Australian Court of Appeal case demonstrates the circumstances in which a court will join a prospective defendant in an apportionable claim. In Hart v JGC Accounting & Financial Services Pty Ltd [2015] WASCA 22, Nikola Fudlovski, Rosemary Fudlovski, Fudlovski Investments Pty Ltd and Bluechip Enterprises Pty Ltd (collectively ‘the plaintiffs’) sued JGC …

Continue reading »

Insurance Review January 2014

Welcome to Insurance Review January 2014, DLA Piper’s publication dedicated to the insurance industry. In this edition we report on developments across the insurance industry, including the long-awaited amendments to the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth), other regulatory developments, class actions and major coverage cases. We also report on the latest cases in many classes …

Continue reading »

The Morganite principle – revisited

No – Morganite is not some new material that erodes Superman’s powers. Rather, it is a colloquial reference to the decision of Morganite Ceramic Fibres Pty Ltd v Sola Basic Australia Limited (1988) 5 ANZ Ins Cas 60-883. In essence, Morganite is authority for the proposition that, where a wrongdoer settles with an insured, an …

Continue reading »

NSW ‘out of the frying pan’ over fire

The largest single civil case before the ACT Supreme Court has come to an end. In Electro Optic Systems Pty Ltd v The State of New South Wales; West & West v The State of New South Wales [2012] ACTSC 184, his Honour Chief Justice Higgins determined that NSW was not liable for the loss …

Continue reading »

Older posts «