Monthly Archives: January 2018

Hall & Wilcox bolsters planning and public sector strength with new partner

Leading independent business law firm, Hall & Wilcox, has added public sector and property expertise with Rory O’Connor joining the Property and projects team as a partner in the firm’s Melbourne office.

Rory was previously at Norton Rose Fulbright and specialises in planning and environmental law.

Read full article
ILN Today Post

Court of Justice of Rio Grande Do Sul condemns furniture store using unlicensed software

The 5th Civil Chamber of the Rio Grande do Sul Court of Justice (TJ-RS) condemned a furniture store to pay, as compensation, 10 times the market value for each software used without the respective license.

The lawsuit was filed by several technology companies after they allegedly identified which computer programs they were using were being used by the unlicensed store.

Read More

Read full article

Tomorrow Is Yesterday: Today’s Cases Boldly Going Where Our Blogs Have Gone Before

Sometimes blogging topics are hard to come by.  It is often difficult because, as a sage once noted in discussing the search for The Ultimate Computer, one wants to do one’s best, but something like creativity “doesn’t work on an assembly line basis. … You can’t simply say, today I will be brilliant,” insightful, informative or even mildly amusing.  But other times topics materialize right before your eyes, as if dropped on your desk by fate or chance, and then they seemingly write themselves, without either assembly lines or much hard work.

Read full article
ILN Today Post

Verbal agreement of use of image cannot have presumed term

The São Paulo Court of Justice condemned a toy maker to pay $ 20,000 in damages for material and moral damages for misusing a young girl’s image of her baby in one of her child’s toy containers.

According to the Rapporteur of the case, even if there was a verbal license for use of image signed between the parties, it could not be assumed that such a contract would have been renewed to the point that it could last for 14 years.

Read More

Read full article
ILN Today Post

Court of Appeals denounces company for unfair competition in sponsored announcements

The São Paulo Court of Justice (TJ-SP) upheld the judgment of a lower court judge who ordered a company to pay $ 15,000 for diverting its competitor’s clientele through the purchase of sponsored links from Google.

The First Instance Judge had emphasized that the expressions used to identify the products and services marketed by the plaintiff would not be in common use, which would make them unique and distinctive in their market segment. Thus, the company, by associating the author’s expressions with his e-mail address, would be unduly benefiting from the author’s reputation and reputation to attract attention to his products and services, which would constitute a practice of unfair competition.

Read More

Read full article
ILN Today Post

Insights Should I File a Customs Prior Disclosure?

Many importers have experienced, at one time or another, that horrible, stomach-turning feeling that comes with the realization that merchandise they have been importing has been entered under the wrong HTS code or with the incorrect value. These and similar errors constitute violations of 19 U.S.C. § 1592, and upon such discovery, the importer must ask, “Should I submit a Prior Disclosure to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”)?” The answer to that question will depend on a variety of factors, which will be discussed in this article.

Read More

Read full article
ILN Today Post

Foreign Companies Must be Mindful of the Extraterritorial Reach in the Newest U.S. Sanctions Law Developments

Pursuant to Section 231(a) of the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (“CAATSA” or “the Act”),[1]  beginning January 29, 2018, President Trump is required to impose five or more of the Act’s laundry list of sanctions, found in Section 235, on persons that the President has determined to have knowingly engaged in a “significant transaction” with a person that is part of, or operating for or on behalf of, the defense or intelligence sectors of the Russian government. This article reviews the extraterritorial impact of the Act on non-U.S. persons, and provides some guidance regarding how to best prepare for these new developments.

Read More

Read full article

January 2018 Visa Updates

January 2018 saw further updates being released by the Department of Home Affairs (DHA). Many of the updates are in line with the planned changes to the work visa from the current 457 program to the Temporary Skill Shortage (TSS) visa. We set out below a summary of the latest updates.

Updated Skilled Migration List

Department of Immigration and Border Protection (DIBP) in consultation with the Department of Jobs and Small Business (DJSB) have updated the list of eligible occupations for sponsorship. In November, DJSB introduced a traffic light management system to give businesses an opportunity to present submissions on the proposed changes to the sponsorship list.

Read full article

First cab off the rank – FWC finds Uber driver is not an employee

The legal status of Uber drivers in Australia has been questioned since the ride service commenced here at the end of 2012. With Uber facing legal challenges from drivers in the US and the UK it was only a matter of time before the issue came before the Fair Work Commission (FWC).

On 4 January 2018, the FWC published its decision in Kaseris v Rasier Pacific V.O.F1 in which it found that an Uber driver could not claim that he had been unfairly dismissed by Uber because he was an independent contractor and not an employee.

Read full article

Top Court Orders Transportation Agency to Consider Obese Passenger Complaint

Delta Airlines Inc. v. Gábor Lukács (2018 SCC 2)  This decision of the Supreme Court of Canada was released on January 19, 2018.
Dr. Gábor Lukács filed a complaint with the Canadian Transportation Agency (“Agency”) alleging that Delta Airlines Inc. (“Delta”) had applied discriminatory practices governing the carriage of obese persons.  The Agency dismissed the complaint on the basis that Dr. Lukács failed to meet the tests for private interest standing and public interest standing as developed by and for courts of civil jurisdiction.  The question was whether the Agency’s decision was reasonable.  Chief Justice McLachlin (Justices Wagner, Gascon, Cote, Brown and Rowe, concurring) concluded that it was not and remitted the matter to the Agency to reconsider whether to hear the complaint.
Read full article