With a background managing software development projects and scientific and technology companies prior to being called to the law, our Principal is uniquely qualified to advise on aspects of scientific and technical matters.
Why choose Dundas Lawyers®?
Having exerted Blood Sweat and Years® since April 2010 we are the team you want on your side for the long term to act as the ‘bodyguard’ for your business in the scientific and technical industry. Some of the reasons clients choose Dundas Lawyers® include:
- our Uncommon business acumen;
- our Uncommon expertise in transactional, compliance and litigious matters;
- our Uncommon expertise forensic case preparation;
- our Uncommon customer focus;
- the fact that we don’t just know law, we know business!
- how we leverage our Uncommon Nous® to provide client centric solutions.
Considering getting a lawyer to advise your business?
For a confidential, no obligation initial telephone call to find out how we can help your business gain an uncommon advantage in the scientific and technical industry, please phone our team on either 1300 386 529 or 07 3221 0013.
Malcolm Burrows B.Bus.,MBA.,LL.B.,LL.M.,MQLS.
Legal Practice Director
T: +61 7 3221 0013 (preferred)
M: +61 419 726 535
E: mburrows@dundaslawyers.com.au
Recent insights for scientific and technical companies
-
Use of a competitors trade marks for comparative advertising
Comparative advertising can be a powerful tool, but it must be done within the bounds of the law. Learn more about the legal implications of comparative advertising in Australia, including the case of GlaxoSmithKline Australia Pty Ltd v Reckitt Benckiser (Australia) Pty Limited (No 2) [2018] FCA 1. Read more
Recent Federal Court decisions regarding scientific and technical companies
-
Chou v Metstech Pty Limited [2023] FCAFC 205
COPYRIGHT – appeal and cross-appeals – whether primary judge erred in making a declaration as to copyright subsistence and ownership and an order for delivery up – whether the plaintiffs in the proceeding below failed to join a necessary party – whether the declaration made is an order in rem – where no objection to…
-
Native Extracts Pty Ltd v Plant Extracts Pty Ltd [2023] FCA 1265
CONTRACT – restraint of trade – confidentiality clause – admissions made of breaches of contract during hearing of trial in relation to competing business – certain relief granted at conclusion of trial CONSUMER LAW – admitted breaches of Australian Consumer Law – injunctions and corrective advertising ordered before final judgment in interests of consumers COPYRIGHT…
-
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Dell Australia Pty Ltd (No 2) [2023] FCA 983
The Federal Court imposed a jointly proposed agreed pecuniary penalty as a deterrent despite defendants’ cooperation and contrition. The size of the contravener and its parent company were taken into account, and the maximum penalty may apply despite less serious misconduct.
