We recently posted an article on the importance of the often forgotten Harman obligation that legal practitioners do not use documents obtained through a compulsory court process for a collateral purpose. This article describes a disciplinary decision about a practitioner who unintentionally breached the Harman obligation. It underscores the importance for practitioners to understand their obligations to the Court.

Holman Webb is pleased to announce that eleven lawyers have been included in the 2024 Edition of The Best Lawyers in Australia, and Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in Australia. Since it was first published in 1983, Best Lawyers has become universally regarded as the definitive guide to legal excellence. 

Every so often, a case comes up that reminds us of an often forgotten undertaking that solicitors owe the court: the “Harman” undertaking.  

The Harman undertaking concerns documents or information that the court compels third parties to produce.  It operates to prevent any of the parties to litigation from using documents obtained in the course of that litigation for the purpose of other unrelated proceedings, without the leave of the court.

Generally, the court will look for special circumstances explaining why a document should be released for use in other proceedings.  Even when special circumstances are established, the court still has discretion regarding whether to authorise the release of the information. 

The Full Court of the Federal Court recently handed down its decision in Garner v Central Innovation Pty Limited [2022] FCAFC 64, a case about misuse of confidential information.  In its decision, the Court made numerous important observations concerning how claims should be advanced, and how litigation should be pursued.

This article will focus on what the Court stated in respect of:

• Whether a Plaintiff ought to be confined expressly to the matters it has pleaded, or whether it can advance claims outside of the pleadings where notice is provided to the Defendant; and
• The circumstances under which a claim for loss can be brought by shareholders of a company, and/or whether the company should bring it.

Holman Webb is pleased to announce that eight lawyers have been included in the 2023 Edition of The Best Lawyers in Australia, and Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in Australia.

​Holman Webb is pleased to announce six promotions across our Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane offices – effective 1 July 2021.

Holman Webb Lawyers is proud to relay that the firm has been listed as a finalist in two categories in the Lawyers Weekly Australian Law Awards 2021:

• Law Firm of the Year
• Insurance Team of the Year

Click through for more information on this year's finalists, and upcoming winner announcements.

Recent examples of the damage or destruction of culturally significant Aboriginal sites and artefacts has led to a debate about the most appropriate legal tools for their protection. One recent success story wherein a creation 'story site' on Prince of Wales Island (Muralug) in the Torres Strait was protected from a safe harbour development, demonstrates that the courts are willing to step in and grant urgent protection.

NB. This article was originally published in the May 2021 edition of The Law Society of NSW's Law Society Journal (Issue 77).

Holman Webb is pleased to announce that five lawyers have been included in the 2022 Edition of The Best Lawyers in Australia.

In a legal first, Holman Webb has assisted an Indigenous group to obtain an injunction to protect a culturally sensitive story site on Muralug Island (Prince of Wales) from works proposed by the Torres Shire Council.  

As a result of this injunction, the site was able to be protected until other proceedings were able to be brought in the Planning and Environment Court against a development approved by the Council at the Pearl Harbour site on Muralug Island.