Harwood Andrews Dispute Resolution and Litigation team is delighted to have been identified by clients and peers for expertise and abilities in Victoria in the 2026 Doyles Guide.

Harwood Andrews is delighted to have been recognised by clients and peers for our expertise in Victoria in the 2026 Doyle’s Guide. Doyle’s Guide is a highly regarded, independent annual review of the state’s leading Agribusiness law firms and lawyers.

When a commercial contract goes wrong, one of the first questions is: how much could this cost me?

Harwood Andrews is pleased to announce that a number of our lawyers have been recognised in the 2027 edition of The Best Lawyers® in Australia. Since its first publication in 1983, Best Lawyers has become widely regarded as a definitive guide to legal excellence.

Capital reductions allow companies to return capital to shareholders or cancel shares, but the process is tightly regulated under the Corporations Act and ASIC. Understanding the approval requirements, creditor protections and ASIC steps is essential to avoid risk.

On 11 March 2026, the High Court of Australia handed down its highly anticipated decision in Taylor v Killer Queen LLC [2026] HCA 5, allowing the appeal of Australian fashion designer Katie Jane Taylor and preserving her registered trade mark "KATIE PERRY" for clothing following an application to cancel the mark by world-famous pop superstar Katy Perry.

The Australian Bureau of Statistics has transitioned to publishing the Consumer Price Index (CPI) on a monthly basis, starting in November 2025. Previously, CPI was released only on a quarterly basis.

CPI is often used to determine rent increases in commercial and retail lease agreements. So how does this transition to monthly CPI affect your lease and how you calculate rent?

In January, the Supreme Court of Victoria handed down judgment against an applicant who had become the sole director of a company acting as trustee of a unit trust which held property in Victoria valued over $1 million. The Supreme Court confirmed the Commissioner of State Revenue’s assessment that the applicant acquired ‘control’ over the landholder and made a relevant acquisition for the purposes of the Duties Act. It was held the applicant made a relevant acquisition in the landholder of 100%.

The matter of KES v Commissioner of State Revenue [2026] VCAT 75 considered whether the property in question was both ‘residential land’ and ‘vacant’ as defined in the Land Tax Act 2005 (Vic) and therefore, whether vacant residential land tax had been correctly applied by the Commissioner. The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal found that despite the property being in disrepair, it was capable of being used for residential purposes and had been vacant for at least six months in the relevant land tax year.