Dispute Resolution & Litigation

Strategic dispute resolution and commercial litigation for businesses, individuals, and their advisors and insolvency practitioners.

Sladen Legal works with clients to manage risk, resolve disputes and achieve commercial outcomes. Our dispute resolution and litigation team provides clear, practical advice and support from the earliest stages of a dispute through to mediation, arbitration or proceedings in courts.

We collaborate closely with business owners, accountants, insolvency practitioners and professional advisors to set the right strategy—balancing commercial objectives, time, cost, evidence and risk. Where litigation is necessary, we act decisively. Where early resolution is possible, we pursue it.

We act in complex disputes in the State and Federal jurisdictions, and we are experienced in modern litigation tools and processes, including eDiscovery, online mediation and technology-enabled hearings.

We regularly assist with disputes involving:

  • Commercial and shareholder /director disputes

  • Property development, purchasing or sale and leasing of property

  • Insolvency and debt recovery

  • Tax disputes with the ATO and SRO

  • Franchising disputes for franchisors and franchisees

Contact Us 

To discuss how we can assist, please get in touch. 

Phone: +61 3 9611 0182
Email: disputes@sladen.com.au


Our dispute resolution services are structured around the types of disputes most commonly faced by commercial clients and their advisors.

Tax Disputes
Commercial Disputes
Franchising Disputes
Property Disputes
Estate Litigation
Insolvency

Dispute Resolution Insights

Featured
A tale of safe harbour and misleading and deceptive conduct: lessons for directors and company officers

While company directors will generally be held personally liable for insolvent trading, the safe harbour provisions under section 588GA of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Corporations Act) provides protection, if certain conditions are met.

Breaking down the draft Unfair Trading Practices Bill: what the changes could mean for your business

In February, the Federal Government published a draft Competition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) Bill 2026 (Cth). The draft proposes significant restrictions in relation to drip pricing, subscription contracts and unfair trading practices that manipulate, distort or detriment consumers. This article breaks down the major proposals and their effect on businesses.

Legal professional privilege: How safe are your documents in the hands of others?

Knowing about legal professional privilege (LPP), when it applies and how it can be protected (and lost) is not something that may be on everyone’s radar on a day-to-day basis; by the time it is, it is usually already too late.

This article looks at a recent decision of the Supreme Court of South Australia concerning LPP and how LPP can be held and treated by more than 1 person: PK v The Salesian Society Inc [2025] SASC 208.

Assessing when a limitation period applies to a claim and substantiating loss: Lessons from R Lawyers v Mr Daily

The task of assessing whether a claim may have expired due to the application of a statutory limitation period and how to substantiate a loss claimed if there is a viable claim is not always straightforward.

In the decision of R Lawyers v Mr Daily [2025] HCA 41, the High Court of Australia clarified when a limitation period will start running for professional negligence and the evidence needed to substantiate a claim for loss where negligence has been established in a case involving a binding financial agreement.


Removing a Liquidator – the case of Gemwood Projects Pty Ltd (in liq)

Justice Croft of the Supreme Court of Victoria removed a liquidator from the winding up of a company determining he failed to act honestly by settling unfair preference claims with the ATO and SRO without disclosing key information in Re Gemwood Projects Pty Ltd (in liq) [2025] VSC 819.  

The line between licence and franchise: is the agreement a franchise?

In the decision of Leon Cycle Pty Ltd v Hi5 Scooters Pty Ltd and Jamal Raad Raad, Her Honour Judge Burchell held that the Licensing Agreement between Leon Cycle and Hi5 Scooters was not a franchising arrangement for the purposes of the Franchising Code of Conduct.

Read More

Our approach

A strategy-first approach to resolving disputes.

We tailor our involvement based on what your dispute requires and what outcome you are trying to achieve. Our focus is to help clients make confident decisions with a clear understanding of risk and realistic options.

We assist clients to:

  • Assess the dispute early (strengths, evidence, exposure and leverage)

  • Preserve documents, prepare for disclosure and eDiscovery and protect your legal professional privilege

  • Develop a resolution strategy aligned to commercial objectives

  • Pursue settlement through negotiation, mediation, arbitration, expert determination or litigation

  • Commence or defend proceedings where required

  • Manage the litigation process efficiently through to hearing and enforcement and  guide and support clients through that process


We work seamlessly with accountants, tax agents, experts and advisors to align dispute strategy with broader commercial and tax considerations.
At Sladen Legal we involve ourselves in a client’s dispute in a variety of ways. We believe the best outcome is achieved by collaborating with our clients to understand their business, and their needs.

Commercial Disputes

We act in high-stakes commercial disputes involving contracts, shareholder obligations, directors’ duties, the Australian Consumer Law and reputational risk. Our focus is on preserving value and managing disruption while pursuing the best available outcome.

We assist with:

  • Partnership and shareholder disputes, including oppression proceedings under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)

  • Contract disputes (breach, termination, enforcement and restraint issues)

  • Australian Consumer Law claims under the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) (misleading or deceptive conduct, unconscionable conduct, consumer guarantees, breaches of Industry Codes such as the Franchising Code of Conduct, the Grocery Code and others)

  • Intellectual property-related disputes (including infringement and misleading conduct)

  • Defamation matters

Property Disputes

We work closely with our property team and act for landowners, purchasers, sellers, developers and commercial tenants in disputes involving buying or selling a property, developments, joint ventures, leasing and owners corporations.

We assist with:

  • Commercial property development disputes

  • Joint venture and development rights disputes

  • Disputes arising from sale or option  agreements

  • Caveats and caveatable interests (including removal of caveats)

  • Retail and commercial leasing disputes, including the Retail Leases Act 2003 (Vic)

  • Owners corporation disputes, including the Owners Corporations Act 2006 (Vic)

Insolvency

We represent insolvency practitioners, corporations and individuals across insolvency-related litigation, recoveries and examinations, with a focus on fast, commercial decision-making.

We assist with:

  • Regulatory investigations and disputes

  • Recovery and enforcement of uncommercial transactions and unfair preference claims

  • Public and private examinations

  • Statutory demands, winding up proceedings and related applications

  • Creditors’ meetings and insolvency negotiations

  • Bankruptcy recovery and enforcement (bankruptcy notices, creditor’s petitions and sequestration orders), including the defence of creditor’s petitions and  negotiation with stakeholders to achieve the most commercial outcome available

  • Deeds of company arrangement (DOCA) disputes and implementation issues

Insolvency Insights

Featured
A tale of safe harbour and misleading and deceptive conduct: lessons for directors and company officers

While company directors will generally be held personally liable for insolvent trading, the safe harbour provisions under section 588GA of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Corporations Act) provides protection, if certain conditions are met.

Contractual obligation to provide a guarantee from a parent company: Can these be enforced and against who?

When contracting parties agree that guarantees will also be provided, but the guarantor is not a party to the contract, is there an enforceable obligation to provide the guarantee? This article reports on the decision of the Supreme Court of Victoria of Boroondara City Council v ADCO Group Pty Ltd [2025] VSC 774 which had to consider this issue.

Assessing when a limitation period applies to a claim and substantiating loss: Lessons from R Lawyers v Mr Daily

The task of assessing whether a claim may have expired due to the application of a statutory limitation period and how to substantiate a loss claimed if there is a viable claim is not always straightforward.

In the decision of R Lawyers v Mr Daily [2025] HCA 41, the High Court of Australia clarified when a limitation period will start running for professional negligence and the evidence needed to substantiate a claim for loss where negligence has been established in a case involving a binding financial agreement.


Removing a Liquidator – the case of Gemwood Projects Pty Ltd (in liq)

Justice Croft of the Supreme Court of Victoria removed a liquidator from the winding up of a company determining he failed to act honestly by settling unfair preference claims with the ATO and SRO without disclosing key information in Re Gemwood Projects Pty Ltd (in liq) [2025] VSC 819.  

When warranties become an important tool for protection

Well drafted warranties offer purchasers protection by providing an avenue to seek recovery in the event that what is acquired turns out to be different than what it was represented to be by the seller.

This article looks at a case involving a share sale agreement and the outcome achieved when action was taken against the seller due to a breach of warranties offered in the share sale agreement to the purchaser.

Are companies caught by Anti-Corruption legislation under Australian law?

Over the past three years, the Australian Government has placed increasing significance on developing anti-corruption laws at both the domestic and international level. This article provides an overview of some of the legislation which govern this area in Australia, how corporations can be found liable and how to access guides to manage compliance.

Tax Disputes

Working with our award-winning Federal Tax and State Tax teams, we represent clients in tax disputes and administrative appeals, including complex matters involving the Australian Tax Office (ATO) and State Revenue Office (SRO). We also act for tax agents subject to regulatory action.

We assist with:

  •  Administrative reviews involving revenue authorities (including in VCAT and the ART, where applicable)

  • Federal Court, including appellate, proceedings involving ATO decisions and objections

  • Appeals of  tax assessments or the interpretation of tax legislation by the ATO (e.g. Commissioner of Taxation v David Morton (VID 578/2025), Commissioner of Taxation v Hall (VID779/2025), CPG Group Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation (M97/2025))

  • Matters involving the Tax Practitioners Board (regulatory action and disciplinary processes)

Franchising Disputes

We act for franchisors and franchisees to resolve disputes as early and efficiently as possible, protect trading continuity and managing regulatory risk.

We provide strategic advice across negotiation, mediation, termination scenarios and, where needed, litigation—often alongside advisers managing financial, operational or restructuring issues.

We assist with:

  • Disputes about franchise agreements (interpretation, performance and breaches)

  • Termination and exit disputes (including contested termination)

  • Non-compete, restraint and confidentiality issues

  • Misrepresentations, disclosure and misleading conduct allegations

  • Payment disputes (fees, royalties, supply arrangements and rebates)

  • Step-in rights, operational control and brand compliance disputes

  • Disputes involving supplier arrangements and distribution models

Franchising Insights

Featured
Alicia Hill
Breaking down the draft Unfair Trading Practices Bill: what the changes could mean for your business
Alicia Hill

In February, the Federal Government published a draft Competition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) Bill 2026 (Cth). The draft proposes significant restrictions in relation to drip pricing, subscription contracts and unfair trading practices that manipulate, distort or detriment consumers. This article breaks down the major proposals and their effect on businesses.

Alicia Hill
Alicia Hill
Franchising Update: 2025 in Review
Alicia Hill

With the implementation of an updated Franchising Code of Conduct and numerous court decisions on the obligations of franchisors and franchisees, 2025 was a big year in franchising.

We’re recapping the big changes and key takeaways from 2025 that franchisees and franchisors in this article.

Alicia Hill
Alicia Hill
When warranties become an important tool for protection
Alicia Hill

Well drafted warranties offer purchasers protection by providing an avenue to seek recovery in the event that what is acquired turns out to be different than what it was represented to be by the seller.

This article looks at a case involving a share sale agreement and the outcome achieved when action was taken against the seller due to a breach of warranties offered in the share sale agreement to the purchaser.

Alicia Hill
Alicia Hill
Form vs Reality: Where franchisors may be liable for franchisee conduct – lessons from ASIC v Darranda.
Alicia Hill

The recent Federal Court decision in ASIC v Darranda Pty Ltd [2024] FCA 1015 highlights that where a franchisor designs the systems, documents or marketing used by franchisees, it may be held liable for regulatory breaches in its network, even without direct dealings with consumers.

#franchising #franchisorliability #ASIC #RegulatoryCompliance

Alicia Hill
Sladen Legal
Alicia Hill Recognised in Lexology Index Australia & New Zealand 2025
Sladen Legal

Sladen Legal congratulates Alicia Hill, Principal, for her recognition as a Recommended Lawyer in Franchising in the 2025 Lexology Index

Sladen Legal
Alicia Hill
Changing a Franchise Business Structure: Take Aways from Netdeen Pty Ltd v Lindfield Pty Ltd
Alicia Hill

The 28 August 2025 decision of the Court of Appeal of New South Wales in Netdeen Pty Ltd (t/as GJ Gardner Homes) v Lindfield NSW Pty Ltd[i] highlights several important considerations for franchisees and franchisors alike when changing a business structure.

Franchisors should have consideration to the impact that this may have on their existing contractual obligations. Franchisees need to be aware of whether their existing agreements allow for this possibility and consider this prior to entering into a franchise agreement.

The decision also highlights the importance of clear drafting in contracts, even where there has been ostensible agreement between the parties.

Alicia Hill

Estate Litigation

Our highly regarded and award-wining succession and estate planning team represent individuals, family groups and businesses in disputes involving complex estates, trusts and corporate structures.

See our Estate Litigation Service Offering for more details

Dispute Resolution & Litigation Lawyers

Contact Us 

To discuss how we can support your business, or your clients, please get in touch. 

Phone: +61 3 9611 0182
Email: disputes@sladen.com.au