Australia: Arbitration & Dispute Resolution

The Full Federal Court's decision in The NOCO Company v Brown and Watson has fundamentally altered Australia's patent landscape by establishing that divisional applications must disclose the best method known at the divisional filing date, not the parent application date. This ruling creates significant challenges for patent applicants managing global portfolios, as improvements discovered between parent and divisional filings must now be disclosed or risk patent invalidity.

In a significant ruling for insolvency practitioners, the NSW Supreme Court granted liquidators their full remuneration claim of $645,470.40 without any discount, demonstrating the judiciary's willingness to approve substantial fees when supported by thorough documentation.

While the facts of the decision in Leto v Secretary Department of Customer Service [2026] NSWCATOD 26 (Leto v Secretary) are obviously very specific, an insolvency in an applicant’s trading history is frequently...

Ogbonna 8 is a reminder that costs decisions are not always a simple "winner takes all" outcome.

This article sets of the considerations Defendants should weigh up in an early serious harm hearing.

Employers that find themselves embroiled in litigation should always seek legal advice when considering costs orders in this jurisdiction.

Australia has consolidated its standing as a pro-enforcement jurisdiction for international arbitration.

Arbitration emerges as the optimal & most flexible forum for resolving commercial disputes arising from space mining operations.

The use of arbitration to resolve mergers & acquisitions & private equity deal disputes has recently gained significant momentum globally.