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
9 cases linked to Mahons with Yuncken & Yuncken Lawyers · sorted by most recent
Firm:Mahons with Yuncken & Yuncken Lawyers
  • MAGISTRATES’ COURT APPEALAppeal to Supreme Court from final order made in civil proceedingAppeal on a question of lawMagistrates’ Court Act 1989 (Vic) s 109.

    Building Dispute: Court Upholds Magistrate's Ruling in Ghan vs. Southern Star Case

    2024-07-24
Hon. Justice QUIGLEY
Mahons with Yuncken & Yuncken Lawyers
Read case brief
  • PROPERTYLEASELICENCEAgreement granting use ‘to the exclusion of all others’ of car parking spaces and facilities for a 99

    Court Rules in Favor of Restaurant: Car Park Agreement Validated as Lease

    2024-03-14 Hon. Justice KENNEDY
    Mahons with Yuncken & Yuncken Lawyers
    Read case brief
  • COSTSParty/PartyApplication for preliminary discoverywhether or not actions of plaintiffs unreasonable

    No Costs Awarded in Preliminary Discovery Case: Both Parties Commended for Negotiation Efforts

    2023-12-07 Hon. Justice WEINSTEIN

    法官命令不涉及费用,每个当事人都要自行承担起初发现申请的费用。上述命令不影响任何一方依法向法庭申请,如果原告因为按照2023年9月12日达成一致的命令产生的文件而对一名或全部被告提起实质性诉讼,可以在诉讼中寻求变更该命令的救济。

    Mahons with Yuncken & Yuncken LawyersGilbert + Tobin
    Nil
    Read case brief
  • PRACTICE AND PROCEDUREApplication by plaintiff for judgment based on admissions made in the defence of the first defendantSupreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2015, r 35.04ACT International Investment Pty Ltd v Li [2019] VSC 759; Chikabo Pty Ltd v Zphere Pty Ltd (No 2) [2019] VSC 580.

    Court Dismisses Stuart's Bid for Judgment Against Mordialloc Sporting Club: Ruling Highlights Governance Issues

    2023-02-07 Hon. Justice MATTHEWS ASJ
    Mahons with Yuncken & Yuncken LawyersFitzpatrick LegalMcDonald, Slater & Lay - Barristers & Solicitors
    Read case brief
  • PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAppeal on a question of law from orders made by the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal refusing applications made for declarations in respect of consents given by the first respondent in August 2012, November 2012, November 2014 and December 2020Consents given in respect of clauses in an agreement made under s 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Vic)Land subdivided by reference to a permit issued in 2006

    Architect's Dilemma: Court Ruling Upholds Council's Development Decisions in Eltham Land Dispute

    2022-11-14 Hon. Justice O’MEARA
    Mahons with Yuncken & Yuncken Lawyers
    Read case brief
  • FAMILY LAWproperty proceedingsorders altering existing property interestsmeaning of defacto relationship

    Court Splits $1.1 Million Property Sale in High-Stakes Family Law Battle: Claims of Deception and Unequal Contributions Unfold

    2022-07-06 Hon. Justice CAMPBELL CITY X

    根据上述命令,自命令日期起28天内,各方应完成所有必要的事项并执行所有必要的文件和工具,以使妻子从D律师事务所信托款中支付937,483.25美元。自命令日期起28天内,各方应完成所有必要的事项并执行所有必要的文件和工具,以使丈夫从D律师事务所信托款中支付180,649.75美元。若根据第1和第2条命令支付后,D律师事务所仍持有信托款项,则剩余款项应按以下方式支付:妻子被宣布对所有其他目前由她拥有或控制的资产和金融资源拥有唯一的所有权,不受丈夫的限制。丈夫被宣布对所有其他目前由他拥有或控制的资产和金融资源拥有唯一的所有权,不受妻子的限制。如果一方拒绝或未能在书面请求后的14天内执行任何为使上述命令生效所必需的文件或工具,则根据1975年《家庭法》第106A条的规定,澳大利亚联邦法院和家庭法院(一部)的每一位副登记官和法官登记官以及澳大利亚联邦法院和家庭法院(二部)的每一位副登记官和法官登记官均被指派代表该方执行该文件或工具。注意:该命令形式可能受到法院记录的影响。注意:法院根据2021年《澳大利亚联邦法院和家庭法院(家庭法)规则》第10.14(b)条可能对此裁决的副本进行审查,以纠正次要的打字或语法错误,或根据2021年《澳大利亚联邦法院和家庭法院(家庭法)规则》第10.13条记录命令的变更。根据1975年《家庭法》第121条(澳大利亚联邦),在非常有限的情况下,公开揭露与家庭法律诉讼相关的人物、相关人物或证人的程序是违法的。请注意,根据1975年《家庭法》第121(9)(g)条的规定,该法院以Flynn & Hadley的一个化名批准了对该判决的发布。

    Mahons with Yuncken & Yuncken Lawyers
    Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 4AA, 75, 79, 90SM, 90SF)
    Read case brief
  • PRACTICE AND PROCEDUREAppeal to the Trial Division of the Supreme Court of Victoria from the Victorian Civil and Administrative TribunalMust demonstrate a real prospect of successLysaght Building Solutions Pty Ltd v Blanalko Pty Ltd [2013] VSCA 158; (2013) 42 VR 27

    Legal Battle Over Nursing Home Rent Distribution: Court Upholds VCAT's Decision in Krajcar vs. Eastern Central Real Estate

    2022-03-28 Hon. Justice CROFT
    Mahons with Yuncken & Yuncken Lawyers
    Read case brief
  • PRACTICE AND PROCEDURESecurity for costsInherent jurisdictionPlaintiff (applicant) a natural person

    Court Upholds Security for Costs Order, Citing Poorly Defined Claims in Legal Battle

    2021-08-04 Hon. Justice MAXWELL P
    Mahons with Yuncken & Yuncken Lawyers
    Read case brief
  • PRACTICE AND PROCEDURESecurity for costsAppeal from decision of judicial registrarApplication for security for costs against a natural person

    Court Battle Heats Up: Sixth Defendant Wins Key Appeal in Cost Security Dispute

    2020-09-14 Hon. Justice KENNEDY
    Mahons with Yuncken & Yuncken LawyersHWL Ebsworth
    Read case brief
  • Page 1 of 1 · 9 results