Archive for January, 2010

January is the time… to implement Fair Work Act annualised salary notifications and high income guarantees

Wednesday, January 13th, 2010

Norton Rose Minimum entitlements now in operation From 1 January 2010, the new safety net of minimum entitlements comprises two planks: National employment standards (NES) – which are 10 legislated minimum conditions of employment Modern awards – 122 in all, which apply as a common rule to all employees in an occupation or industry as [...]

Australian Consumer Law developments – Dec 2009

Tuesday, January 12th, 2010

An early Christmas? Phase two blueprints to the Australian Consumer Law released Mallesons Stephen Jaques The Ministerial Council on Consumer Affairs (MCCA) has foreshadowed another busy year of trade practices reform in 2010 by releasing a Joint Communiqué, which confirms the much-anticipated blueprints for Phase Two of the Australian Consumer Law (ACL).   Read more [...]

MAIA & UCPR Offers

Friday, January 8th, 2010

Please Login to view this Content.(Not a member? Join Today!)

‘High Income Guarantees – Have you got it right?’

Thursday, January 7th, 2010

Norton Rose Why give a high income guarantee? If your business is subject to the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth), on 1 January 2010, modern awards commence operation and apply to employees covered by the scope of the modern award.   Read more of the article by Norton Rose. Reproduced with permission of Norton Rose in [...]

Cupidity overwhelmed common sense

Tuesday, January 5th, 2010

 Vella & Anor v Gustafson & Ors [2009] QSC 424   Martin J entered judgment against the first Defendant Stephen Gustafson as solicitor for the plaintiffs in respect of failed loan agreement.   The facts centred on Mr Vincent who was described by his Honour as a rogue devising a scheme whereby he facilitated the [...]

Restraint of trade & ‘evanescent’ intellectual information

Monday, January 4th, 2010

EzyDVD P/L v Lahrs Investments Qld P/L & Ors   Their Honours Fraser JA and Fryberg and McMeekin JJ dismissed the appeal by the franchisor, with Fraser JA delivering the leading judgment.   The critical question as later appeared on appeal was summarised at paragraph 31 as follows:   “…whether it was reasonable to impose [...]

David Cormack, Barrister