The High Court confirms the principles of equitable estoppel arising by encouragement from a promise Latest News based on the decision of Kramer v Stone [2024] HCA 48: https://lnkd.in/g4x7BHfz
About us
MolinoCahill provides specialist legal advice to clients involved in the construction, infrastructure, technology, defence, energy and resource sectors. We work with principals, contractors, subcontractors, engineers, consultants, suppliers, insurers and investors on all aspects of: - Tender preparation and negotiations - Project documentation, including contract drafting, advice and negotiation - Risk management - Project delivery - Claims and dispute resolution We work on projects Australia-wide, for an international client base. We deliver innovative, value for money solutions because we understand the markets in which our clients work and the key drivers that determine project outcomes.
- Website
-
http://www.molinocahill.com.au
External link for MolinoCahill
- Industry
- Law Practice
- Company size
- 11-50 employees
- Headquarters
- Melbourne, VIC
- Type
- Privately Held
- Founded
- 2004
- Specialties
- Construction, Infrastructure, Technology, Defence, Energy and resources, Transactional work, and Dispute resolution
Locations
-
Primary
Level 34, 477 Collins Street
Melbourne, VIC 3000, AU
Employees at MolinoCahill
Updates
-
Court rules on when an owner can reasonably refuse defect rectification works Latest News based on the decision of The Owners – Strata Plan No 89074 v Ceerose Pty Ltd [2024] NSWSC 1494: https://lnkd.in/gtm-ih3m
-
Court confirms clear words required to oust common law damages for repudiation Latest News based on the decision of Redrouge Nominees Pty Ltd v Canberra Institute of Technology [2024] ACTSC 263: https://lnkd.in/gk3YKzQD
-
What constitutes a valid offer under the UCPR? Latest News based on the decision of Metro North Hospital and Health Service v Stewart 2024 QCA 226: https://lnkd.in/ghRYaGpf
-
Pay Later, Argue Later? When will a Court grant a stay on payments under SOPA? Latest News based on the decision of Martinus Rail Pty Ltd v Qube RE Services (No 2) Pty Ltd (No 2) [2024] NSWSC 1223 https://lnkd.in/gCXiYbfH
-
Victorian Government’s response to the Victorian Environment and Planning Committee Inquiry reveals broad support for proposed security of payment reforms Latest news on the Victorian Government’s response: https://lnkd.in/gk3qc887
-
Establishing Jurisdictional Error to Set Aside Adjudication Determinations Latest News based on the decision of Babicka v ASD Corporation Aust Pty Ltd [2024] VSC 587 https://lnkd.in/gC6A3ndj
-
New South Wales Court of Appeal overturns decision that Transport for NSW is liable for nuisance arising from construction delays to the Sydney Light Rail Latest news based on the decision of Transport for NSW v Hunt Leather Pty Ltd; Hunt Leather Pty Ltd v Transport for NSW [2024] NSWCA 227: https://lnkd.in/gM3t_ujn
-
Tesseract : - Non-joinder a ‘non-issue’ in applying proportionate liability laws in arbitration - Arbitration remains a valuable dispute resolution mechanism At first glance, the High Court decision Tesseract may appear controversial and might discourage the use of arbitration as a dispute resolution mechanism. This should not be the import of this decision. In our latest article, Michael Cochrane SC offers some further reflections on the implications of this important decision. The result in Tesseract is not the consequence of the parties’ use of arbitration as their dispute resolution mechanism but is the consequence of the applicable rules of law and of not expressly excluding the application of the proportionate liability laws, despite the ability to do so. Rather than undermining the utility of arbitration, Tesseract highlights party autonomy and reinforces this foundational principle and the value of arbitration as a flexible dispute resolution mechanism. https://lnkd.in/gFqhShPC
-
The High Court affirms that a duty of care does not ordinarily extend to avoiding pure economic loss Latest news based on the decision of Mallonland Pty Ltd v Advanta Seeds Pty Ltd [2024] HCA 25: https://lnkd.in/gWcCKHw4