Lisa Deramond

The NSW Supreme Court’s Practice Note on the use of generative artificial intelligence is now in effect. This guidance arrives at a crucial time, following a recent case where a lawyer was referred to the NSW Legal Services Commissioner after submitting court documents containing AI-generated, non-existent case citations. In this video, BN’s Will Stidston breaks down the key takeaways from the new Practice Note, including what’s permitted, what’s prohibited, and the steps lawyers must take to ensure accuracy and confidentiality when using AI in legal proceedings.

67

1 Comment

What does it mean to "play the long game" in today’s legal market? For Lander & Rogers Chief Executive Partner Daniel Proietto, it means staying true to who we are - an independent Australian law firm focused on people, relationships, and delivering outstanding client service. In the latest episode of Lawyers Weekly’s Legal Firesides podcast, Dan sat down with Jerome Doraisamy to reflect on his journey from employment lawyer to leading one of Australia’s most respected independent firms, and to share his perspective on leadership, growth, and the future of legal services. "We run our own race at Landers - we focus on what we do well, and that’s serving our clients." Since stepping into the role of CEP earlier this year, Dan has been focused on balancing the demands of leadership while continuing to serve his clients in the firm’s Workplace Relations & Safety team - a practice he has led for nearly a decade. His approach is grounded in authenticity, transparency, and collaboration. "Leadership, for me, is about being honest, vulnerable and real. It’s about helping people succeed and creating opportunities for them to grow." In the interview, Dan shares insights on: - Why Lander & Rogers remains proudly and fiercely independent, with no plans to merge with international firms - growth is about opportunity, not size. - Playing the long game - investing in our people and clients, not chasing short-term wins. - Vision for growth - deepening our presence in Canberra and Brisbane while continuing to strengthen our national platform across Melbourne and Sydney. - How we’re embracing AI and innovation, focusing on efficiency, adaptability, and creating a culture that’s ready for the future. - The importance of balance - between leadership, client work, and personal wellbeing. "We don’t grow for growth’s sake. We grow to provide opportunities for our people, and to deliver consistency and excellence for our clients." Under Dan’s leadership, the firm has already celebrated major milestones this year, including the opening of our new Canberra office, the move to our new Sydney premises, and continued recognition as one of Australia’s most trusted law firms. For Dan, the constant challenge - and reward - is the same: working with great people and building a firm that remains proudly Australian, values-driven, and future-focused. Listen to the full podcast here: https://lnkd.in/gYAADvwq #Leadership #LegalFiresides #LawFirms 

210

2 Comments

FCFCOA Update: New Requirements for Filing Consent Orders A reminder, from 31 October 2025, the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (FCFCOA) has updated its requirements for filing Applications for Consent Orders. All applications must now include both a signed PDF and an unsigned Word (.docx) version of the proposed orders. The text in the Word document must match the signed PDF, and applications that do not include both versions will not be accepted. This change applies to both legal practitioners and self-represented litigants. It aims to improve the quality and accessibility of published orders, ensuring they are easier to view and share. If you are unable to provide a Word version, the Court can provide guidance via email or live chat. For full details, see the FCFCOA update: https://lnkd.in/g5iihj6j #FamilyLaw #ConsentOrders #FCFCOA #LegalUpdates #CourtProcedures #SelfRepresentedLitigants

41

1 Comment

What AI means for lawyers is a hot topic across the legal industry.  Senior Associate Hannah Fas shares her thoughts with the The Australian Financial Review and is optimistic about its potential. " … it’s certainly not a threat, or I don’t think it should be seen as a threat to legal roles, but more of an enhancement to what we do," Hannah says. https://lnkd.in/gPkAb4eP (paywall) #AI #artificialintelligence #lawyers Hayden Delaney, Steven Hunwicks📶, Briar Francis, Kerry Awerbuch, Andrew Chalet, Katrina Chambers, Tony Conaghan, Ben Coogan, Demetrios Christou, Mark Feetham, Bronwyn Furse, Peter Le Guay, Josh Simons, Angela Summersby, Mathew Baldwin

46

2 Comments

In this latest episode of the 'HRL Lowdown', we discuss the key takeaways from the High Court’s recent ‘Peabody’ decision regarding workplace redundancies. In this video, our legal experts break down what the High Court’s unanimous ruling means for Australian workplaces. Don’t hesitate to contact our team if you require assistance with the redundancy process. #HRL #HrLegalLowdown #Peabody #Redundancy #HCA

42

1 Comment

The Company Directors Course I am undertaking through the Australian Institute of Company Directors has a particular focus on us applying the mindset of an individual #director (and a board of #directors) to the issue at hand. It's quite different to my day-to-day mindset as a legal adviser, which is to identify and resolve the particular issue for the client. Company directors can't stop there; they must critically assess what the issue, its origins, and the company's response reveal about the company, the management team, and the board itself. Factors like culture and ethics, risk management, the adequacy of the compliance framework, and the like. The sustainability of the company depends on that assessment. #ProfessionalGrowth #ContinuousLearning #GovernanceMatters #BoardDirectors

31

A significant ruling from the Victorian Court of Appeal has clarified the legal boundaries around directors’ duties and the use of the Fair Entitlements Guarantee (FEG) scheme in insolvency scenarios, although some questions remain.   The Commonwealth DPP has lost an argument in proceedings brought against the directors of Bruck Textile Technologies, in which the directors were alleged to have breached the criminal liability provisions of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) in 2014 by entering into an agreement with the intention of avoiding or preventing the recovery of employee entitlements.   The prosecutor alleged that the directors orchestrated the sale of the company’s business for $1 to a newly formed entity under their control, transferring most employees but leaving 58 employees behind with nearly $4 million in unpaid entitlements. The directors expected the entitlements to be paid out by FEG upon the subsequent voluntary liquidation of the former employing entity (which is ultimately what happened).   The prosecutor contended that the directors knew the company was insolvent and structured the transaction expecting those employees to be paid under the taxpayer-funded FEG scheme, rather than by the company itself, and that this was a breach of the relevant Corporations Act provisions.   However, the Court found that the directors' conduct by entering into the transaction did not breach the Corporations Act. Crucially, it held that relying on the FEG scheme does not constitute an intention to prevent recovery of the employees' entitlements because recovery via FEG still constitutes recovery of the entitlements for the purposes of the Corporations Act as it was in effect in 2014.   🔍 Things to note: - The relevant provisions of the Corporations Act were amended slightly in 2019 (which was after the conduct that was the subject of these proceedings had occurred). The Court noted that the 2019 amendments may have an impact on its analysis, although did not express a concluded view on this issue. This may open the door for future litigation on this issue. - The Commonwealth Government recently conducted a public consultation in relation to "corporate misuse of the Fair Entitlements Guarantee." While the outcome of the consultation is yet to be announced, this decision may influence the Government's reform agenda in respect of the FEG.

42

3 Comments