Monthly Archives: September 2011

ILN Today Post

Gadens to Welcome Aaron Gadiel as full-time Director in the PEG Team

As reported recently in the Australian Financial Review, Gadens is delighted to announce that Urban Taskforce Chief Executive Officer Aaron Gadiel has been appointed Director in the firm’s Planning, Environment and Government team, effective 31 October 2011.

read more

 

Read full article
ILN Today Post

Out with the old and in with the new: Gadens’ Guide to State Significant Development in NSW (the replacement of Part 3A)

By Anthony Whealy of Gadens Lawyers, Sydney

We are now only days away from the start of critical new planning laws that will govern the assessment of all major development projects in NSW (State Significant Development), following the coalition government’s repeal of Part 3A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act shortly after the March election. Planning Minister Brad Hazzard recently said that he has already signed the new State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) and that it will commence this Saturday, 1 October. read more

 

Read full article
ILN Today Post

McDonald Hopkins Miami Office featured in "Bright Spots: Sept. 29, 2011," published by Crain’s Cleveland Business

McDonald Hopkins Miami Office and Managing Member Raquel “Rocky” Rodriguez featured in “Bright Spots: Sept. 29, 2011,” published by Crain’s Cleveland Business.

http://www.crainscleveland.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110929/FREE/110929816/0/FRONTPAGE

Read full article
ILN Today Post

Benefits to first home buyers purchasing a newly constructed home

By Ros Forrest and Naomi Rothman of Gadens Lawyers, Sydney

With a focus on boosting new housing construction, the NSW Government recently released its Budget for 2011-2012.  read more…

 

Read full article
ILN Today Post

Security of payment alert: termination of building and construction contracts and the subsequent limitations on security of payment rights

By Scott Laycock and Stephanie Venuti of Gadens Lawyers, Sydney

The recent Queensland Supreme Court decision of Walton Constructions (QLD) Pty Ltd v Corrosion Control Technology Pty Ltd & Ors [2011] QSC 67 (Walton) arms respondents with an additional defence to payment claims and presents a new risk to claimants in further limiting their rights to pursue payment under security of payment regimes.  read more

 

Read full article

When It Comes to Non-Compete Agreements, It’s Best to Know Exactly What Your Company Is Acquiring

Restrictive covenants such as non-compete and non-solicitation agreements are frequently used in connection with acquisitions to protect the underlying value of the transaction. After all, an acquiring company typically values the target company based in part on the revenue it generates from its stable of customers. Therefore, the acquiring company often requires the target company’s employees to execute restrictive covenants that limit their ability to “jump ship” after the acquisition closes and erode the value of the transaction by luring away customers. Recently, the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit issued a decision which underscores the importance of carefully examining and understanding any restrictive covenant that may be acquired through a transaction.

Read full article

ABA Opinion Limits Lawyers’ Ethical Duty To Notify Opposing Counsel Upon Receipt Of Adverse Party E-mail Communications With Counsel

By: Jill Barbarino

When defending a litigation filed by a current or former employee, it is now routine practice for the employer’s counsel to review the employee’s workplace e-mails and computer for information relevant to the employee’s claims or the employer’s defenses.  This, of course, is consistent with the principle that the employer’s e-mail and computer systems are the property of the employer and employees have no expectation of privacy with respect to electronic communications sent or received via their employer’s systems.  If, however, an employee has communicated with his counsel using his work-issued e-mail address or computer, does defense counsel have an obligation to notify opposing counsel of his or her possession of the communications?

Read full article
ILN Today Post

Certification Marks: Decision Affirmed by Court of Appeal

An earlier blog discussed a Federal Court decision, agreeing with a decision of the Registrar of Trade-marks and preventing the registration of a certification mark, HALLOUMI, in association with cheese.  In The Ministry of Commerce and Industry of the Republic of Cyprus v. International Cheese Council of Canada, the Federal Court of Appeal affirmed the decision.

The Trade-marks Act defines a certification mark as a type of trademark and sets up a specific regime for its adoption and registration by a person not engaged in the manufacture, sale, leasing or hiring of the wares or services in question, who wishes to license others to use the marks.  With wares a certification mark is intended to signify character or quality, working conditions, the class of persons producing the wares or the area they are produced.

Read full article
ILN Today Post

Randall Sidlosca appointed chair of The Florida Bar Unlicensed Practice of Law Committee

Arnstein & Lehr Attorney Randall L. Sidlosca

Randall L. Sidlosca

Miami Partner Randall L. Sidlosca was recently appointed chairman of The Florida Bar’s Unlicensed Practice of Law Committee (UPL). The UPL Florida Bar 11D Committee investigates and prosecutes unlicensed practice of law allegations in the 11th Judicial Circuit (Miami-Dade County). The committee is empowered to take testimony and make findings concerning complaints of unlicensed practice of law.

Read full article
ILN Today Post

Hal Morris and Katelyn Letizia obtain important victory for condominium association client

Arnstein & Lehr Attorney Hal R. Morris

Hal R. Morris

Arnstein & Lehr Attorney Katelyn Rose Letizia

Katelyn Rose Letizia

Chicago Partner Hal R. Morris and Chicago Associate Katelyn Rose Letizia secured an important victory for a condominium association client. In that case, the board of the association began considering implementing, by rule, restrictions on leasing. Under the Illinois Condominium Act, rules can be adopted or amended by the board after a special meeting of owners called for the purpose of discussing the proposed rule.

In the case, the board began this process, but two unit owners filed an action challenging the process and the enforceability of a rule limiting leasing. The unit owners claimed that the Declaration of Condominium granted a right to lease, subject to the association’s right of first refusal, and a rule limiting leasing would be tantamount to an improper attempt to modify the Declaration. Thus, the unit owners sought a finding that the leasing rule was unenforceable, ran afoul of the Declaration, and also sought to enjoin the association from passing and enforcing such a rule.

Read full article