LegalLink
CasesJudgesLaw FirmsChatPricing
LegalLink
LegalLink

AI-powered legal consultation

Product

  • Cases
  • Judges
  • Law Firms
  • Chat
  • Pricing

Company

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Cookies Policy
  • service@legallink.info

Resources

  • Feedback

Explore Lawyer Registers by State

  • New South Wales, NSW
  • Queensland, QLD
  • Western Australia, WA
  • South Australia, SA
  • Tasmania, TAS
  • Australian Capital Territory, ACT
  • Northern Territory, NT
  • Victoria, VIC
© 2026 LegalLink. All rights reserved.
HomeCases

Real Australian Case Law

Every search returns plain-English summaries grounded in published judgments — never invented precedent.

Filters
21 cases linked to Harris Freidman Lawyers · sorted by most recent
Firm:Harris Freidman Lawyers
  • MININGremittal requiring the provision of reasonsdetermination of compensation for nonfinancial losses

    Court Orders Cobalt to Compensate Grazier for Intrusions and Land Damage in Landmark Mining Case

    2024-05-19
Hon. Justice DUGGAN

The text is likely copyrighted. Can you provide a different text or specific information or keywords to be summarized?

Lander & RogersHarris Freidman Lawyers
Mining Act 1992 (NSW)
Read case brief
  • APPEALthree development applications for jettiesimpact on public access to the beach and foreshorevisual impact

    Court Denies Jetty Plans at Taren Point: Public Access and Scenic Views Win

    2023-11-12 Hon. Justice GRAY

    在2022/353257案件中,法院裁定:(1)上诉被驳回。(2)拒绝位于塔伦角(Taren Point)Woodlands Road 36号和38号之间延伸部分的共享通道、码头和海梯的建设申请(DA21/1085)。在2022/353258案件中,法院裁定:(1)上诉被驳回。(2)拒绝位于塔伦角Woodlands Road 28号和30号之间延伸部分的共享通道、码头和海梯的建设申请(DA21/1062)。法庭的命令作为2023年12月7日更新如下:在2022/353256案件中,法院命令:(1)上诉被驳回。(2)拒绝位于塔伦角Woodlands Road 52A号和54号之间延伸部分的共享通道、码头和海梯的建设申请(DA21/1164)。(3)D、1、4和7号证据被退回,其余证据被保留。

    Harris Freidman Lawyers
    Coastal Management Act 2016 ss 4, 5, Sch 3 cl 4
    Read case brief
  • COMMERCIALProperty development ventureP introduces D1 (a friend) to an investor (P’s then boyfriend) and D1 by the trustee of his family trust (D2) suggests and enters into a project with the investor through the mechanism of a Unit Trust to develop property at Meadowbank purchased by a company (D3)D1 commits his time and expertise to the project and investor commits initial funds pending further investors providing more substantial funds

    Property Power Play: Assault, Duress, and a Disputed Deed in High-Stakes Development Deal

    2023-10-04 Hon. Justice MEEK

    原告的索赔被裁定为不成立,而第一被告的反诉被支持。当事人需要提交法官命令的简短摘要。

    Sunfield Chambers Solicitors & Associates 阳光海富律师事务所Kammoun Sukari LawyersHarris Freidman Lawyers
    Chancery Amendment Act 1858, 21 & 22 Vict, c 27
    Read case brief
  • FAMILY LAWCOSTSWhere the parties settled the matter by consent on the second day of the final hearingWhere the Independent Children’s Lawyer made an application to the Court for the parties to equally share in the costs of the Independent Children’s Lawyer

    Shared Costs, Shared Care: Court Orders Parents to Equally Fund Legal Support in Parenting Case

    2023-08-02 Hon. Justice MCCLELLAND SYDNEY

    根据《2021年澳大利亚联邦巡回法庭和家庭法院(家庭法)规则》第10.2部分的同意,并根据由各方、独立儿童律师和法院于2023年8月3日签署的名为"独立儿童律师命令备忘录"的文件所作,作出命令、声明和记录,附在下面。 在这些命令的日期之日起26周内,母亲应向新南威尔士法律援助支付2080.38美元的费用,作为她对独立儿童律师的专业费用的贡献。包括,如果新南威尔士法律援助同意,可以分期付款。 在这些命令的日期之日起26周内,父亲应向新南威尔士法律援助支付2080.38美元的费用,作为他对独立儿童律师的专业费用的贡献。包括,如果新南威尔士法律援助同意,可以分期付款。 注意:命令的形式取决于法院记录的输入。 注意:根据《2021年澳大利亚联邦巡回法庭和家庭法院(家庭法)规则》第10.14(b)条,本裁决的副本可能会进行审查,以纠正轻微的排印或语法错误,或根据《2021年澳大利亚联邦巡回法庭和家庭法院(家庭法)规则》第10.13条记录对命令的变更。 根据1975年澳大利亚家庭法案第121条,发布揭露涉及家庭法律诉讼的人、相关人或证人的诉讼是违法的,除非在非常有限的情况下。 注意:按照1975年澳大利亚家庭法案第121(9)(g)条的规定,法院已经批准以"哈塞克和瑟斯坦"的化名在此刊登本判决。

    Harris Freidman Lawyers
    Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 117
    Read case brief
  • JUDICIAL REVIEWs 155 of Mining Act 1992 (NSW)remitter from Court of Appealscope of remitter

    Court to Reassess Compensation: Key Remit in Landmark Mining Case After Appeal

    2023-07-06 Hon. Justice DUGGAN

    Paragraphs 33 and 34 discuss the power of the judge to issue orders in a court proceeding. It emphasizes that the judge's order must be followed and respected, as it carries the authority of the court. It also highlights the importance of addressing the judge as "your honor" as a sign of respect for their position. Additionally, it mentions that failing to comply with a judge's order can result in serious consequences, including being held in contempt of court.

    Lander & RogersHarris Freidman Lawyers
    Mining Act 1992 (NSW)
    Read case brief
  • COSTS

    Court Rules Appellants to Foot Two-Thirds of Appeal Costs in Landmark Mining Case

    2023-02-14 Hon. Justice WARD P

    上诉人支付被上诉方诉讼费用的三分之二。对于上诉人的诉讼费用不作任何规定。

    Lander & RogersHarris Freidman Lawyers
    Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), s 98
    Read case brief
  • ENERGY AND RESOURCESMiningExplorationLicence

    Mining Access Ruling Sparks Legal Battle Over Sheep Station Rights

    2022-12-15 Hon. Justice WARD P AT [1]

    1. 部分上诉获准。 2. 将该问题提交给达根法官,以确定应由上诉人支付的在一审判决[43]和[44]-[46]中确定的可赔偿损失的计量。 3. 上诉费用保留。 4. 指示各方在2023年2月3日之前提交简短的费用书面意见,并在2023年2月10日之前回复其他方关于费用的意见,以便通过文件方式处理费用问题。

    Lander & RogersHarris Freidman Lawyers
    Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), s 56
    Read case brief
  • COSTSsecurity for costsplaintiff resident outside jurisdictionalternative proprietary claims against two defendants arising from property investment venture

    Court Orders Security for Costs in $60K Property Investment Saga: Expat's Claims Against Two Defendants Under Scrutiny

    2022-07-21 Hon. Justice PARKER

    这段文字不能被使用,因为它缺少必要的信息来进行摘要。

    Harris Freidman LawyersGoodwin & Co Lawyers
    Administration of Justice Act 1920
    Read case brief
  • COSTSss 155(8) and 155(9) of Mining Act 1992 (NSW)dispute of reasonableness of quantum of costs claimed by Respondentscosts of the application for costs

    Court Decision Secures $12,925 for Respondents in Mining Costs Dispute

    2022-06-02 Hon. Justice DUGGAN

    The text mentions that the judge's order was final and could not be appealed. It also states that the judge's decision was based on evidence and testimony presented in court. Additionally, the text notes that the judge's honor and integrity were essential in rendering a fair and just verdict.

    Lander & RogersHarris Freidman Lawyers
    Mining Act 1992 (NSW)
    Read case brief
  • FAMILY LAWPROPERTYInterlocutory dispute over $720,000 held in the trust account of the wife’s solicitorsWhere final property, periodic and non

    Family Feud Over $720,000: Court Rules on Child Support and Living Expenses Amid Financial Dispute

    2022-04-25 Hon. Justice HARPER SYDNEY

    根据2022年2月9日的法庭命令,根据进一步的命令,从Harris Freidman Lawyers律师事务所的信托账户中每周向丈夫发放8805美元用于租金和生活费用,自2022年5月2日开始。在七天内,支付给丈夫3.5万美元,专款用于支付法律费用。需要注意的是,该命令的形式需要根据法院记录进行确认。此审判裁决的副本可能会经过审查,以纠正轻微的排版或语法错误(根据2021年联邦巡回和澳大利亚家庭法院(家庭法)规则10.14(b)),或者根据规则10.13进行变更以记录命令的变化。澳大利亚1975年家庭法案第121条规定,除非在非常有限的情况下,发布涉及家庭法律诉讼中的人员、相关人员或证人身份的案件是违法的。值得注意的是,根据澳大利亚1975年家庭法案第121条第9(g)款的规定,本法院已批准以化名“Snipper&James”发布本判决。

    Harris Freidman Lawyers
    Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (Cth) Div 5, Div 4, ss 114(1), 114(3), 117(4), 117(6), 117(7), 117(7A), 117(8), 118, 123(1), 123A, 124, 129
    Read case brief
  • CONTRACTbreach of contractland sale contractnature of breach

    Court Ruling: Builder Held Accountable for $500,000 Land Sale Breach as Appeals Court Clarifies Contract Damages

    2022-04-25 Hon. Justice MACFARLAN AT [1]

    以下是文本的概要: (1) 允许上诉。 (2) 撤销初审法官于2021年6月16日作出的第2号令和2021年7月1日作出的第3号令,并代之以以下命令: (a) 宣布交叉诉讼原告有权根据《2005年民事诉讼法》第100条对交叉被告作出判决,判决金额为2013年7月10日至2021年6月16日期间加上利息的500,000美元; (b) 宣布原告和交叉诉讼原告各自的权益进行抵销,抵销日期为2021年6月16日; (c) 修改2021年7月1日第1号命令中原告获胜的判决金额,仅确定截至2021年6月16日期间被告欠原告的余额,考虑到上述(a)宣布的内容,该判决于2021年6月16日期生效; (d) 被告支付原告索赔的诉讼费用; (e) 原告支付被告反诉的诉讼费用。 (3) 被上诉方支付上诉方的上诉费用。 (4) 命令上诉方支付于2021年8月9日根据法庭命令作为诉讼费用的保证金存入法院的45,000美元及其任何利息,从法院外支付给上诉方。 (5) 命令上诉方支付于2021年9月21日根据法院命令存入法院的45,787.80美元及其任何利息,从法院外支付给被上诉方。 (6) 指示各方在7天内提交达成上诉结果的协商命令,以确定被告欠原告的余额判决。

    Harris Freidman Lawyers
    Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), ss 90, 100
    Read case brief
  • LAND LAWStrata titleWhether the owners corporation breached the duty to properly maintain and keep in a state of good and serviceable repair the common propertyWhether the owners corporation is liable to carry out remedial works

    Court Orders Strata Company to Pay Up and Fix Mould Issue: Landmark Ruling on Common Property Maintenance

    2022-01-23 Hon. Justice G BLAKE AM

    法官命令被告在2022年5月24日之前完成指定的整改工程,如果被告不遵守此命令,申请人有权在提供合理通道的情况下重新提起诉讼。被告需在2022年5月24日之前向申请人支付$70,551.99。其他庭审请求被驳回。如果各方对庭审费用有异议,则需在限定时间内提出书面申请和证据。

    Harris Freidman Lawyers
    Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW)
    Read case brief
  • COSTSinterlocutory costscosts thrown away by reason of amendments to the plaintiff’s statement of claimapplications by defendants for immediate payment of sums on account and for a stay of the proceedings until payment is made

    Costly Amendments: Court Orders Plaintiff to Pay for Costly Legal Delays in Mosman Property Investment Dispute

    2022-01-17 Hon. Justice PARKER

    请参阅[58]-[60]。

    Harris Freidman LawyersGoodwin & Co Lawyers
    Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) Sch 2 – Australian Consumer Law, ss 236, 243
    Read case brief
  • GUARANTEE AND INDEMNITYGuarantorRight to indemnityRefinance agreement entered into by corporate agent of partnership comprised of three companies

    Partnership Dispute: Court Rules on Guarantors' Indemnity Rights After Complex Exit Negotiations

    2021-12-12 Hon. Justice BRERETON AT [1]

    (1)允许上诉和反诉; (2)撤销地方法院于2021年5月6日作出的判决和命令,并代之以:(a)判决被告(共同和分别)向原告支付217,814美元,该判决自2021年5月6日起生效,被告有权和有责任在首被告承担51%,第二被告承担39%,第三被告承担10%的比例中相互分摊;(b)命令任何被告支付其份额后,其他被告在本判决下再行赔偿其免受任何进一步的支付或责任,并通过向其支付或向主债权人支付或以其他方式使其免除超出其自己份额的责任;(c)保留在执行(b)命令过程中出现任何困难时向地方法院申请的自由;(d)命令第二被告支付原告的费用; (3)命令被上诉方支付上诉方的费用。

    Harris Freidman Lawyers
    District Court Act 1973 (NSW), ss 46(1), 134(1)(h)
    Read case brief
  • COSTSSecurity for costsDismissal

    Court Ruling: Cost Security Motions Dismissed in Hercules vs. Gennie Battle

    2021-03-07 Hon. Justice SCOTTING

    以下是上述文本的概要: (1)被告于2020年12月15日提交的动议通知被驳回。 (2)原告于2021年2月8日提交的动议通知被驳回。 (3)动议通知的费用是案件的费用。

    Harris Freidman Lawyers
    Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)
    Read case brief
  • FAMILY LAWAPPEALPARENTINGAppeal from final parenting orders

    Court Upholds Parenting Orders in Controversial Family Law Appeal

    2019-10-02 Hon. Justice ALDRIDGE SYDNEY

    (1) 对上诉的呼吁被驳回。 (2) 上诉人需要支付以下费用: (a) 第一被申请人:4,000美元; (b) 第二被申请人:4,060美元; (c) 第三被申请人:4,410美元。 注意:该命令的形式需在法院档案中记录。根据《1975年家庭法法案》(Cth)第121(9)(g)条的规定,蔡浩和阿尔伯特等人的家事法院裁决决定允许该法院以化名Nghiem & Alberts and Ors发布。注意:这份法院判决理由的副本可能会经过审核,以纠正次要的排版或语法错误(根据《2004年家庭法规则》(Cth)第17.02A(b)条的规定),或者记录对命令的变更(根据《2004年家庭法规则》(Cth)第17.02条的规定)。

    Harris Freidman Lawyers
    Read case brief
  • INTERESTrunning accountbalance moves from debit to credit due to payments on accountcalculation of interest

    Court Rules in Favor of Company: Director's Unauthorized Transactions Exposed in Landmark Case

    2019-07-18 Hon. Justice PARKER

    请参见[177]-[180]。

    Harris Freidman Lawyers
    Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), ss 98, 100
    Read case brief
  • FAMILY LAWAPPEALCOSTSWhere factors under s 117(2A) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) considered

    Family Law Appeal Closed: Costs Order Favors First Respondent Amid Unequal Financial Grounds

    2018-01-11 Hon. Justice AINSLIE-WALLACE CITY X

    (1) 申诉人和第二答辩人应立即支付甲方的上诉费用及与上诉相关的费用,金额按照当事人/当事人的基础上确定,比例如下: (a) 由申诉人承担80%; (b) 由第二答辩人承担20%。 注意:订购表格需要记录在法院文件中。根据1975年《家庭法案》(Cth)第121(9)(g)条的规定,本法院以James & Snipper 和Anor的假名发布该裁决。注意:这份法庭的判决理由的副本可能会进行审查,以修正小的排版或语法错误(2004年《家庭法规定》(Cth)17.02A (b)条), 或记录根据2004年《家庭法规定》(Cth)17.02条对订单进行变更。

    Harris Freidman Lawyers
    Read case brief
  • FAMILY LAWAPPEALPROPERTY SETTLEMENTTreatment of tax debt

    Court Rules in Complex Family Law Dispute: Appeal Dismissed in Property Settlement and Parenting Orders

    2018-01-11 Hon. Justice AINSLIE-WALLACE SYDNEY

    以下是对该文本的中文总结:(1)上诉被驳回。(2)被上诉人应在这些命令的日期后的21天内提交并送达她关于费用的书面意见。(3)上诉人和第二被上诉人应在这些命令的日期后的42天内提交并送达关于请求的书面意见。注意:订单的形式需在法院记录中输入。根据《1975年家庭法》第121(9)(g)条的规定,本法院已批准以化名James & Snipper和Anor的形式刊登该裁决。注意:本裁决的副本可能会经过检查以纠正轻微的排版或语法错误(《2004年家庭法规则》17.02A(b)条),或者记录根据《2004年家庭法规则》17.02条对命令的变更。

    Harris Freidman Lawyers
    Read case brief
  • FAMILY LAWAPPEALAPPLICATION IN AN APPEALREINSTATEMENT

    Justice Served: Court Reinstates Family Law Appeal Despite Minor Delay

    2016-08-29 Hon. Justice ALDRIDGE SYDNEY

    以下为概要: (1)要求恢复2016年EA 167号上诉。 (2)要求将提交上诉索引的时间延长至2016年10月25日,且包括该日。注意:订单的形式受到订单记录的影响。值得注意的是,根据1975年家庭法案的第121条第9款第g项,本法院已批准以Telama&Telama为假名在本法院发布此判决。注意:本法院对判决理由的这份副本可能需要进行审查,以纠正一些字母或语法错误(2004年澳大利亚联邦家庭法规定的第17.02A(b)条款),或记录根据2004年澳大利亚联邦家庭法规定的第17.02条进行的订单变更。

    Harris Freidman Lawyers
    Read case brief
  • (Cth)Whether there was sufficient evidence for the primary judge to find exceptional circumstances and hardshipAppeal allowed. FAMILY LAWAPPEAL

    Court Overturns Child Support Ruling: Mother Granted New Hope In Ongoing Family Dispute

    2016-08-29 Hon. Justice RYAN SYDNEY

    以下是对文本的中文总结: (1) 同意申请人提出上诉。 (2) 同意对于2016年8月30日1号和2号令提出的上诉。 (3) 撤销2016年8月30日1号和2号令。 (4) 将诉讼程序交由联邦巡回法院重新审理,由除了亨德森法官之外的法官负责。 (5) 关于费用问题不做任何判决。 (6) 法院根据1981年《联邦诉讼(费用)法案》第9条的规定,授予申请人一份费用证书,该证书依据法院意见,适合让司法部长根据该法案向申请人支付与上诉相关的费用。 (7) 法院根据1981年《联邦诉讼(费用)法案》第8条的规定,授予申请人一份费用证书,该证书依据法院意见,适合让司法部长根据该法案向申请人支付与重新审理相关的费用。

    Harris Freidman Lawyers
    Read case brief
  • Page 1 of 1 · 21 results