Do pre-action protocols promote justice and efficiency? Satellite litigation flowing from pre-action protocols

Learn the essential steps for drafting and filing a statement of claim in Queensland courts, from identifying the correct jurisdiction and parties through to proper service of documents. This guide breaks down the technical requirements for pleading material facts, particularising claims, and ensuring compliance with court rules and approved forms.

Queensland civil procedure requires defendants to respond to each factual allegation with precision—admissions, denials, or non-admissions must be properly explained, while inadequate responses risk being treated as admissions. Replies serve a distinct and limited purpose, addressing only new matters raised in the defence that could affect the claim's maintainability or introduce unexpected factual questions.

Libel, slander, and defamation are legal terms that address false statements that harm an individual's or business's reputation.

A NSW Statement of Claim is a legal document that enables a person to initiate local court proceedings.

Explanation & discussion about the different standards of proof required in criminal cases as compared to civil cases.

In Queensland, proving defamation requires establishing that a defendant published defamatory matter identifying the plaintiff to third parties, causing serious reputational harm. However, even when all elements are satisfied, claims may still fail due to procedural requirements, corporate plaintiff restrictions, or available defences under the Defamation Act 2005.

Legal professional privilege shields confidential communications made for obtaining legal advice or litigation purposes, but Queensland's civil procedure rules impose strict disclosure requirements and affidavit obligations when privilege claims are challenged. Expert reports and drafts face particular scrutiny, as they may not qualify for privilege protection under the rules.

Understanding who can be held liable for defamatory statements requires examining the complex legal concept of publication in defamation law. From traditional publishers to modern digital intermediaries, the scope of liability extends far beyond the original author, though recent Queensland legislation has introduced important exemptions and defences for certain online actors.

When a defendant in Queensland civil litigation wishes to pursue its own claim against the plaintiff, a counterclaim provides the procedural mechanism to do so within the existing proceeding. Understanding the technical requirements for pleading, serving, and answering counterclaims—including joinder of additional parties, limitation periods, and the effect of discontinuance—is essential for both claimants and respondents navigating commercial disputes.

Proving negligence and legal causation is not as straight forward as the commonly accepted concepts and definitions.

The Australian Financial Complaints Authority has published new guidance clarifying how insurers must handle claims, including strict timeframes and expanded compensation rules. Insurers now face potential liability beyond policy limits for unreasonable delays, and may be required to compensate claimants for non-financial losses. With storm season approaching and complaint volumes rising, these changes create significant operational and financial pressure on the insurance industry.

On 26 June 2026, the Federal Court of Australia delivered judgment in Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Mercer Superannuation (Australia) Limited [2026] FCA 832, ordering Mercer Superannuation (Australia) Limited (MSAL) to pay $10.3 million in penalties and $1.2 million in costs.

ASIC's Report 838 reveals significant transparency gaps in motor vehicle insurance premium communications, finding that renewal documents often fail to explain price changes adequately and that over 30% of consumers who contacted their insurer successfully negotiated lower premiums. The report establishes clear expectations for better practice in pricing disclosures and signals continued regulatory scrutiny of insurance pricing practices.

The Full Court of the Federal Court has clarified critical procedural requirements for employers managing medical incapacity terminations and defending general protections claims. This landmark decision addresses when workplace relations advisers must give evidence in proceedings and whether show cause letters constitute unlawful threats under the Fair Work Act.

APRA and ASIC have called on regulated entities to demonstrate that their governance, cyber controls, operational resilience and third-party risk arrangements can operate at frontier-AI speed.

APRA and ASIC have released their 2026–27 Corporate Plans, signalling more intensive supervision and enforcement, alongside targeted measures intended to reduce unnecessary regulatory burden. Their priorities span operational resilience, cyber security, artificial intelligence, consumer protection, insurance, superannuation, market integrity and digital assets. For regulated entities, the plans provide a practical roadmap of the areas most likely to attract supervisory attention, information requests and, where deficiencies are identified, enforcement action.

APRA’s most recent accountability enforcement action against Bendigo and Adelaide Bank (BAB) for failures to address known cyber weaknesses within its group demonstrates how seriously it takes cyber risk management.

Generative AI can be a valuable tool in legal practice, but using public AI platforms with confidential or privileged information can create significant risks. We examine two recent overseas decisions and what they may mean for Australian businesses, insurers and lawyers when it comes to preserving legal professional privilege and maintaining confidentiality.

The NSW Land and Environment Court dismissed a heritage homeowner's claim against neighbouring trees, finding insufficient evidence to prove the trees caused structural damage. The decision establishes that property owners must demonstrate clear causal connections between specific trees and alleged damage, rather than relying on proximity alone.

An NCAT decision demonstrates how chronic maintenance failures by owners corporations can result in substantial costs orders, even without damages awards. The case clarifies when lot owners can be quarantined from contributing to legal costs and establishes clear responsibilities for identifying and delineating repair obligations in strata schemes.