Shows
Coffee and a Case NoteJames d'Apice interview with Ryan Tan on the 'Ryan Tan Show' | November 2025In late 2025 James was lucky enough to sit down with Ryan Tan for a wide-ranging interview traversing James' insights about branding, the building of his firm Gravamen, and what the future might hold...___www.gravamen.com.auYou can find the Ryan Tan show here: The Ryan Tan Show - Podcast - Apple Podcasts
2025-11-191h 19Coffee and a Case NoteStay or Go?: Part Three, Just and Equitable Winding Up | Jonathon Dooley of Greenway Chambers and James d'Apice of Gravamen for BenchTVAs part of a series of three talks together, James d'Apice recently joined eminent senior junior barrister Jonathon Dooley of Greenway Chambers to discuss the law of Just and Equitable Winding Up (s 461(1)(k) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)).This is Jonathon's and James' third talk about the big ticket items when advising your shareholder clients whether they want to *stay* or whether they want to *go*.The three talks they gave on this topic were:1. Corporate oppression (this talk!)2. Derivative actions (to be released in future)3. Just and...
2025-10-2258 minCoffee and a Case NoteStay or Go?: Part Two, Derivative Actions | Jonathon Dooley of Greenway Chambers and James d'Apice of Gravamen for BenchTVAs part of a series of three talks together, James d'Apice recently joined eminent senior junior barrister Jonathon Dooley of Greenway Chambers to discuss the law of Derivative Actions (ss 236 and 237 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)).This is Jonathon's and James' second talk about the big ticket items when advising your shareholder clients whether they want to *stay* or whether they want to *go*.The three talks they gave on this topic were:1. Corporate oppression (this talk!)2. Derivative actions (to be released in future)3. Just and equitable winding up...
2025-10-211h 04Coffee and a Case NoteJames d'Apice interview with Steve Cole on 'Path to Partnership' Podcast | August 2025In August 2025 James had an opportunity to sit down with recruiter and expert podcaster Steve Cole to discuss his career path, his approach to marketing, and the many uses of his childhood nickname "Peach".We hope you enjoy this discussion!___You can find Steve's podcast 'Path to Partnership' here: Path to Partnership - Podcast - Apple Podcasts
2025-09-231h 09Coffee and a Case NoteJames d'Apice on Law Society's 'Just Chat' Podcast | August 2025James was lucky enough to sit down and chat with Amy Dale from the Law Society to have a deep chat about the law, life, and James' past - as well as some lighter moments chatting Gravamen merch and horror film podcasts!James doesn't hold back about personal reflections even on touchy subjects like mental health and money.(James also made sure he dropped Amy and the legendary co-host Francisco Silva one of his very popular Gravamen hoodies!)___You can find a link to the Law Society's 'Just Chat' podcast here...
2025-09-141h 00Coffee and a Case NoteJames d'Apice and Iolanthe Gabrie, Ruby Assembly | Real Ambition Podcast June 2025James had a chance to sit down and chat with the legend, boss of Ruby Assembly, and all-round all-star Iolanthe Gabrie on her podcast Real Ambition in June 2025.Together they get deep on branding, Rory Sutherland, and contemporary horror films. Check it out!You can find Iolanthe's podcast here: https://open.spotify.com/show/3fgIdiaiSxD4F8iZO7xgXo
2025-07-1636 minCoffee and a Case NoteLawyers Weekly interview with James d'Apice | Jerome Doraisamy on the Boutique Lawyer Podcast June 2025James was lucky enough to sit down and chat with the legendary leader of Lawyers Weekly, Jerome Doraisamy in 2025 and had an in-depth conversation and life, law, and where Gravamen is still a side-hustle...You can find a link here https://www.lawyersweekly.com.au/podcast/42265-the-boutique-lawyer-show-unique-branding-charitable-donations-and-the-firm-as-a-side-hustle?utm_source=LawyersWeekly&utm_campaign=05_06_2025&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Boutique-Podcast&utm_emailID=55716e27c79db04faaa6ed1f3d3988938ab8fa86ca99f7fc2679bf363ed418c8
2025-06-3034 minCoffee and a Case NoteIn the matter of Cryptai Pty Ltd (No 2) [2025] VSC 217“Don’t call the meeting to sell those shares!”___P was a shareholder in D1. D1 owned Techshares, shares in TechCo: [1]D1 did not trade. Its purpose was holding Techshares: [16] The Techshares were illiquid: [25], [26]A GM of D1 was called proposing D1 would either (i) sell the Techshares to a specified purchaser or (ii) failing that, go into MVL: [2]P sought injunctions restraining D1 from calling the meeting: [3]P said: P had made a purchase offer more favourable to D1 than the proposed offer, and inadequate time had be...
2025-05-2009 minCoffee and a Case NoteLi v Perpetual Holdings Pty Ltd [2025] NSWSC 175“That loan was for a purpose. Pay it back!”___P sued natural persons and Cos. D1 was not served and D2 was bankrupt, leaving P to pursue Cos only: [9]P’s dad spoke with D1 and D2 about an investment. P later transferred $9.2m to one of the DCos: [3], [5]There was no written agreement: [6]In 2017, all agreed the $9.2m would be used for property investment, that if the property bought was then sold in a year 35% would be returned, and if unsold the funds would be returned: [6]In 201...
2025-03-3111 minCoffee and a Case NoteJames d'Apice, Jordan Vaka, and Nathan Fradley | Challenge the Standard Podcast March 2025This is probably my favourite podcast to appear on as a guest! Another great discussion with Jordan and Nathan about life, branding, Drake v Kendrick, hourly rates, touch football results, and how to chart a principled path in professional services.Enjoy!You can find Jordan's and Nathan's pod here: https://podcasts.apple.com/au/podcast/challenge-the-standard-in-financial-advice/id1725733771Nathan's site: https://www.nathanfradley.com.au/Jordan's site: https://www.planningsolo.com.au/www.gravamen.com...
2025-03-281h 09Coffee and a Case NoteStay or Go?: Part One, Corporate Oppression | Jonathon Dooley of Greenway Chambers and James d'Apice of Gravamen on Corporate Oppression for BenchTVAs part of a series of three talks together, James d'Apice recently joined eminent senior junior barrister Jonathon Dooley of Greenway Chambers to discuss the law of Corporate Oppression.This is Jonathon's and James' first talk about the big ticket items when advising your shareholder clients whether they want to *stay* or whether they want to *go*.The three talks they gave on this topic were:1. Corporate oppression (this talk!)2. Derivative actions (to be released in future)3. Just and equitable winding up (to be released in future)...
2025-03-251h 00Coffee and a Case NoteGillespie v Gillespie [2025] NSWCA 24"You need to show good faith to sue on the Co's behalf!"___A sought to bring a derivative suit on behalf of TCo. TCo was trustee of a trust. A was a principal benef of the trust: [3]Pursuant to the trust deed, absent a resol from TCo the trust’s income would be paid to the trust’s principal benefs: [3]From 1988 to 1994 A was a director of TCo: [3]Broadly, as former director A sought to bring a claim on TCo’s behalf re a 2005 transaction that saw the Rs (or ent...
2025-03-0608 minCoffee and a Case NoteIn the matter of Macarthur Farm Pty Ltd [2025] NSWSC 40“Repay that tax refund into the trust!”___P was a Unit TeeCo incorporated by D1. D3 (whose sole dir and s/holder was D1) was the sole unitholder. D2 was D1’s spouse: [1] - [3]D1 incorporated P to buy a valuable piece of land (“Property”). P borrowed the funds from Lender for that: [4]After completion, D1 caused P to lodge a BAS. The resultant refund of ~$2.6m was paid to P: [5]P sued seeking repayment: [8], [10]The Ds said $1.1m of it was a “Success/Performance Fee” for D1 and $1.5m was a “Management/Performance Fee” for D1: [13]D1 was an experienced pro...
2025-02-2609 minCoffee and a Case NoteGainer Associates Pty Limited [2024] NSWSC 1437"Pay the trust's funds to the estate!"
___
A Tee was the trustee of a trust with about $2.8m in assets. The trust had two beneficiaries, Spouse 1 and Spouse 2: [2], [8]
Spouse 1 died in 2014 bequeathing their estate entirely to Spouse 2: [2], [11]
The Tee lost the trust deed: [2]
While general law dictated some of the terms of the trust, having lost the trust deed the Tee has no certainty about the beneficiaries of the trust (aside from Spouse 1 and Spouse 2): [3]
The Tee was incorporated in 1982 and some evidence suggesting...
2024-11-2805 minCoffee and a Case NoteMacquarie Retail Pty Ltd v Dexus Capital Funds Management Ltd [2024] NSWSC 1413“Hey! You can’t transfer your shopping centre stake to them!”
____
Two contracts governed the relationship between co-owners of a large, suburban shopping centre: [1]
In 2012 the co-owners were P as to 50%, and two other entities in the same group for 25% each: [2]
The arrangement contained rights regarding share transfers; the breach of which allowed the non-breaching party to automatically buyout the breaching party’s stake: [5]
In 2014, after some compliant share transfers, the ownership structure became 50/50: [7], [8]
In 2022, following a restructure of middling complexity (to this humble litigator!), P’s co-owner t...
2024-11-1409 minCoffee and a Case NoteWarner Capital v Shazbot [2024] NSWCA 245“The partnership’s book is a liability, not an asset!”
___
A and R operated an insolvency practice in partnership. Like many such businesses, it would build up “WIP” in a matter and that WIP would be paid (or not) over time: [3], [4], [6]
The business was profitable: [49]
In September 2014, A ended the partnership electing to go out on their own with most of the business’s book of work: [7] - [10]
A number of pieces of litigation followed. Some led to orders for an account of the partnership to be taken: [5], [14]
This proce...
2024-11-1108 minCoffee and a Case NoteEighth Avenue Austral Pty Ltd [2024] NSWSC 1262"Is it the tree that's held in trust, or just the fruit?"
___
The Ps came to Court arguing that one D - a trustee, DTee - held shares in the other D, a Co, on trust for the Ps: [1], [3], [4]
The Ps further sough for the shares be transferred to the Ps: [2]The Co’s defence essentially put the Ps to proof - a “non admission”: [5]
DTee took a more expansive approach: [5] - [8]
After particulars of its defence were sought, DTee asserted that if the Ps were benefs of a trust...
2024-10-2409 minCoffee and a Case NoteDavid & Ros Carr Holdings Pty Ltd v Ritossa [2024] NSWSC 1125“We need to *wind up* the trust and sell the farms!”
___
The Ps and the Ds each owned 50% of the units in a unit trust: [1]
TCo owned substantial real property - farms. The Ps sought to have the trust ended and distribute the assets. The Ds took the opposite view: [5]
The Ps said: 1. there was an agreement or estoppel that if one party wanted to exit, the assets would be sold; 2. the trust deed allowed a unit holder to terminate; 3. the TCo’s conduct was oppressive; and 4. a receiver should be appoin...
2024-09-1712 minCoffee and a Case NoteJames d'Apice Interview with Rebecca Barry August 2024 | Glover Lane's 'What Keeps You Up At Night?' PodcastIn August 2024 James was invited to appear on Glover Lane's ESG podcast, 'What Keeps You Up At Night?'
This interview traverses Gravamen's journey to becoming a firm that tries to live its values by donating $1,000.00 per month to charity; and reflects on what the future might hold.
It's also a great primer for anyone hoping to understand ESG a little better.
You can find Rebecca Barry's firm Glover Lan here: https://www.gloverlaneconsulting.com.au/
2024-09-0958 minCoffee and a Case NoteDirect FX Trading Pty Ltd (in liq) (No 2) [2024] NSWSC 1079“Some of these debts are trivial… do I still have to pay the really small ones?”
___
2,653 clients deposited money with a Co, who was a trustee. Only 74 of those beneficiary clients had a balance worth over $100: [2], [3]
A liquidator, P, was appointed to the Co: [1]
P approached the Court seeking advice as to whether (i) the benefs with a
2024-09-0507 minCoffee and a Case NoteMamae Pty Ltd [2024] NSWSC 1032“Bring the company back from the dead so we can go to Court!”
___
P approached the Court to seek the reinstatement of a deregistered Co: [1]
In 2010 the Co was incorporated. Shortly afterwards P and D1 - who were siblings - were the 2 Dirs and 2 equal shareholders: [4], [5]
P said that at about this time P and D1 agreed the Co would purchase some property, each funding 50% of the purchase, each owning a 50% share, and each entitled to 50% of the rent. The property was tenanted by D1: [7]
Shortly after this, the Co b...
2024-08-2708 minCoffee and a Case NoteSingh v Singh [2024] NSWSC 932“Valuation is art not science; so let the partnership’s receiver sell it.”
___
10 partners - 5 family members and their spouses - planned to run a blueberry farming and forestry business on land owned by the partnership: [2], [5]
8 partners, the Ps, sued the other 2, the Ds: [3]
In 2007 the partners purchased the Property and entered into a deed: [4], [6]
The deed required that forestry profits and losses be shared equally; but that each partner would take berry farming profits and bear losses in relation to their own plots on the Property: [12]
It was...
2024-08-1908 minCoffee and a Case NotePirrottina v Pirrottina [2024] NSWSC 558“Our parents’ citrus farm is a partnership asset!”
___
Two siblings in partnership, P and D, ran a citrus farming business, having received it from their parents in the 2000s: [1]
(P, the parents’ exec, sought access to the parents’ privileged documents after death. As exec, P could waive privilege, however doing so was for themselves and not in the interests of the estate or benefs. Noting an exec’s duty to avoid conflict, access was denied: [4] - [10])
In the 1990s the parents gifted D the “Lot”, a part of the citrus farm: [29] - [31], [45], [5...
2024-06-1710 minCoffee and a Case NoteProgressive Politics, Corporate Law, and a Pair of Financial Advisors | James d'Apice, Jordan Vaka and Nathan Bradley on the Challenge the Standard Podcast, April 2024The most fun James has ever had guesting on another podcast!
There's laughter, James' advice for how to enjoy Drake, there's more laughter, and there's also some depth as James, Jordan and Nathan reflect on what it means to be progressive (and to question some of the central tenets of capitalism) while also doing financial and corporate work.
A wonderful chat - James just hopes he gets invited back!!!
2024-06-0656 minCoffee and a Case NoteYour Digital Reputation Podcast | James d'Apice and Roger Christie April 2024In April 2024 James sat down with Roger Christie, MD of Propel, to talk about the use of LinkedIn for building a legal practice (but it's extremely interesting and includes James having to take a pause because Roge has said something pretty moving and insightful).
You can catch the Digital Reputation Podcast here: https://propelgroup.com.au/podcast/
2024-05-3151 minCoffee and a Case NoteMel Storey's Counsel Podcast | Mel Storey and James d'Apice November 2023Gaaaah! James got to be the first ever private practice lawyer on Mel Storey's incredible in-house counsel themed podcast, Counsel!
This pod was recorded IMMEDIATELY after James launched his firm Gravamen at the Happy Lawyer Happy Life retreat in November 2023.
Grab yourself a mimosa and enjoy this incredible chat.
A link to Mel's podcast is here: https://www.counselpodcast.com
2024-05-2237 minCoffee and a Case NoteJC Jewels Pty Ltd [2024] NSWSC 532“Give me back my job selling diamonds!”
___
A Co that sold diamonds and jewellery had 4 shareholders, entities related to the Co’s directors who were P1, D2, D3, and D4: [1], [9]
P1 and their sibling, P2, were fired by the Co from their roles as CEO and sales director respectively: [3]
The Ps (including P1’s shareholding entity) sued alleging the Co’s conduct was oppressive to P1 and seeking inter alia P1 and P2’s reinstatement on the basis of s232 oppression: [4], [5]
A Terms Sheet and employment contract governed P1’s relationship...
2024-05-1612 minCoffee and a Case NoteJames d'Apice chat with Amogh Kadhe - ChatterMatters Podcast April 2024James got to sit down for a chat about his progression through the world of legal practice with the legal Amogh Kadhe, of the ChatterMatters Podcast in early 2024.
Please enjoy!
You can find the ChatterMatters LinkedIn page here: https://www.linkedin.com/company/chattermatters-podcast/?originalSubdomain=au
2024-05-091h 01Coffee and a Case NoteTrident Austwide v Bagcorp [2024] NSWSC 479“I’ve retired as a partner. I want market value with no discounts!”
___
In 2018, 4 Cos entered into a partnership agreement. The business related to growing and selling tea: [1], [5]
P retired from the partnership. The agreement provided that the partnership would not be dissolved on a partner’s retirement: [2]
The question was: what value should P receive for its partnership stake?P argued for, in essence, a pro rata distribution according to its 19% stake: [3]
The Ds, who were the remaining partners, argued for a market value approach i.e. including discount...
2024-05-0908 minCoffee and a Case NoteLewis v Martinez and the persons named in the Schedule (No 5) [2024] NSWSC 359“You tried to kick me out of the law firm partnership!”
___
A partnership operated a law firm. A deed governed the partners’ relationship. The partners were either fixed draw (“salaried”) partners or (often more lucrative) capital partners: [1], [2]
Each partner was a trustee of a separate trust: [2]
P was a capital partner, purportedly expelled from the partnership in November 2020: [5]
P said the purported expulsion was contrary to the deed; meaning P remained a partner or was entitled to damages: [6]
The Ds characterised the partnership as “easy in, easy out” - partn...
2024-04-3008 minCoffee and a Case NoteJames d'Apice on the Personal Branding Unlocked Podcast - March 2024In March 2024 James had a chat with Josh Lawlor and Monica Walmsley from the Personal Branding Unlocked podcast.
It's a wide-ranging chat that features James' views on his own branding *journey* with some lessons you can apply in your practice.
You can find the PBU pod here: https://www.personalbrandingunlocked.com.au/
2024-04-251h 01Coffee and a Case NotePark v Monreacon Pty Ltd & Ors [2024] QSC 44“Compensate the company. Then pay that money to me!”
___
P, a former shareholder, sought to bring a claim on behalf of the Co and then have the proceeds paid to themselves: [1] - [3]
s237(2)(a): the Co was not going to bring the claim itself: [8]
s237(2)(d): the Court considered (i) whether the pleaded case could be proved, and (ii) if so whether that would ground the relief sought: [12]
When practising, P was the sole shar...
2024-04-1110 minCoffee and a Case NoteDavid Turner and James d'Apice - Discussion on the Hearsay Podcast February 2024In early 2024 James sat down (remotely) with David Turner to chat about starting a law firm from scratch.
Even though James was only a matter of weeks (!) into his journey he did his best to share everything he could - warts and all.
Please enjoy this revealing and entertaining chat between James and David.
___
You can find other episodes of Hearsay: The Legal Podcast here: https://hearsay.legalcpd.com.au/episodes/
2024-04-0146 minCoffee and a Case NoteJames d'Apice in conversation with Jacob Malby - March 2024In March 2024 James had the opportunity to talk with Communications and Law student and producer of the Hearsay Legal Podcast, Jacob Malby, about creativity, freestyle rap, and law.
This conversation traverses Coffee and a Case Note as well as other projects of James' with his Spooko co-creator, Thomas McMullan.
A link to Spooko is here: https://fbiradio.com/podcast/spooko/
A link to Hearsay is here: https://hearsay.legalcpd.com.au/
2024-03-2823 minCoffee and a Case NoteIn the matter of BH Holdings QLD Pty Ltd [2024] NSWSC 132“It’s my wind-up application, so surely I should get my choice of liquidator...?”___The Ps brought an application to windup various entities on the s461(1)(k) just and equitable basis, and to appoint receivers to the assets of the associated trusts: [1], [2], [6]The various entities were variously incorporated and settled to develop a marina. That development did not progress as hoped: [3], [13]The relationship between Dir1 and Dir2, the 50-50 controlling minds and shareholders of the relevant entities, irrevocably broke down: [1], [4], [5]The Court found it was just and equitable that the various companies be placed into l...
2024-03-0306 minCoffee and a Case NoteMunja Bakehouse Pty Ltd [2024] NSWSC 6“We can’t order a share sale. Decide yourselves, or it’s getting wound up!”
___
A number of plaintiffs applied for relief in relation to a shareholder dispute.
Through the litigation the issues in dispute narrowed.Both the plaintiffs and defendants preferred for the Ds to buy out the Ps. A winding up order was all parties’ second preference: [1] - [6], [19]
Commencing in 2014, the Ps and Ds incorporated Co1 and Co2 to (i) operate a GF bakery and (ii) own the land the bakery was situated on: [8] - [10]
Evidentiary wrinkles included o...
2024-02-0809 minCoffee and a Case NoteJames d'Apice's chat with Mike Bromley from Beyond Billables - January 2024In January 2024 James got to sit down and chew the fat with BB head honcho, Mike Bromley!
They spoke about the founding of Gravamen, the dreaded work / life balance, and why James finds TikTok boring.
You can find BB here: https://www.beyondbillables.com/blog
2024-02-0754 minCoffee and a Case NoteJames d'Apice's chat with Lara Quie for the Legal Genie Podcast - December 2023In December 2023 James caught up with Lara Quie from the Legal Genie Podcast to discuss social media, marketing, legal practice, horror films, battle rap, and everything inbetween!
You can find the Legal Genie podcast here: https://thelegalgeniepodcast.buzzsprout.com
2024-01-1649 minCoffee and a Case NoteIn the matter of Wholesome Child Holdings Pty Ltd [2023] NSWSC 1530“Yep! You can sue the author to get the company’s IP from them.”___A Co’s Dir, P, sought to bring derivative proceedings against a Co’s majority shareholder, D.P wanted declarations that the Co (and not D, who was also the book’s author) was the owner of all intellectual property rights in relation to a book: [1], [6]P said that after D wrote the book, D and the Co entered into an agreement for the Co to acquire the IP in the book: [7]Alternatively, P said D was estopped from asserting they owned t...
2023-12-2509 minCoffee and a Case NoteAuswild v Bergmuller [2023] VSC 589“Let’s appoint an IP to chase the group’s debts!”___The Ps were 48% shareholders of a group of Cos that owned luxury car dealerships. The Ds were directors representing 52% of shareholders.The 52% majority owed a judgment debt to the group. The Ps proposed a course for recovering the debt. The Ds used their votes at board level (including a casting vote) to vote down the Ps’ course and vote up their own: [2]There was deep “anger” and “animosity” between the Ps and Ds and “very bitter and distrustful” feelings [58], [69]The Ps argued the Ds had a conflict of i...
2023-12-2010 minCoffee and a Case NoteInterview with The Australian Law Student Podcast - Alex Nielsen and James d'Apice November 2023In November 2023 James d'Apice sat down to chat with Alex Nielsen of The Australian Law Student Podcast about his approach to practice, overcoming "fuck ups" including bad marks on exams, and the future of James' law firm Gravamen.
You can find the Australian Law Student here: https://www.theauslawstudent.com
2023-12-1231 minCoffee and a Case NoteRovere v Rovere [2023] NSWSC 1410“Your share of the sale proceeds gets reduced for us dealing with your complaints!”
___
3 siblings co-owned real property. They disagreed on what use it ought to have been put to. 2 siblings, the Ps, applied to appoint s66G Tees, successfully.The Tees sold the land and distributed the Ps’ shares of the sale proceeds. The remaining sibling - the defendant, D - contested the Tees’ fees and criticised their management of the sale: [1] - [4]
The Tees applied to be paid further remuneration from the D’s share (based on those costs arising from the D’s co...
2023-12-0608 minCoffee and a Case NoteGhorbanzadeh [2023] NSWSC 1330“Those notes aren’t privileged! Hand them over.”___P sued D in relation to personal injuries P alleged at around the time they were giving birth. D, to oversimplify, was the hospital’s insurer: [7], [9]D instructed an expert who produced a report.P filed a NoM seeking access to a document produced by the expert in response to a subpoena, but over which D asserted legal professional privilege: [1], [9]P said the document was not privileged or, if it was, privilege was waived: [6]D had briefed the expert and invited the expert to initially provide...
2023-11-2207 minCoffee and a Case Note"The derivative action and its evolving availability to beneficiaries of trusts' - A CLE presentation given by James d'Apice for TVED on 6 November 2023In November 2023 James gave a presentation for prominent CPD provider TEN about a developing area of trust law.
In this CLE, James explores:
1. The corporate derivative action
2. Some litigated examples of it
3. The Court's decision in Gillespie v Gillespies Cranes Nominees Pty Ltd [2022] NSWSC 1184
4. Practical suggestions for dealing with corporate derivative actions
5. Practical suggestions for the evolving landscape arising from Gillespie
A link to TEN's website is here: http://www.tved.net.au
#auslaw
#coffeeandacasenote
2023-11-1756 minCoffee and a Case Note'When the rubber hits the road' - A lecture by James d'Apice at Macquarie University 30 October 2023On 30 October 2023 James was lucky enough to accept an invitation from Dr Madeline Taylor to give a lecture in Dr Taylor's commercial law course at Macquarie University.
During this talk James discusses the "gap" between the theory learned at university and what happens when the rubber hits the road, in legal practice.
In the discussion, James refers to cases including:
Carpenter v Morris [2021] NSWSC 1700
Campbell v Campbell [2022] NSWSC 554
SSC Super Pty Limited [2022] NSWSC 686
Gillespie Cranes Nominees [2022] NSWSC 1184
Australian Karting Association Ltd [2022] NSWCA 188
M & L Richardson Pty Limited [2021] NSWSC 105
#auslaw #coffeeandacasenote #macquarieuniversity
2023-11-0855 minCoffee and a Case NoteGrain Technology v Rosewood (No 5) [2023] NSWSC 1141“Your Honour, would it be OK if I entered into this deed?”___Long-running litigation was on foot relating to, among other things, land with a value of around $40m.By NoM, a receiver appointed by the Court to the relevant Ds in the litigation sought the Court’s advice about whether they would be justified entering into a Deed settling all the pieces of litigation: [12], [15]The receiver relied on evidence, including confidential advice from counsel on the nature of the settlement: [17]Some earlier claims, being a portion of the matters in dispute, were settled in a d...
2023-09-2908 minCoffee and a Case NoteComments on Just and Equitable Winding Up of Companies | A one hour CLE from James d'ApiceIn July and August 2023 James d'Apice gave a series of one hour CLEs "live" on Facebook, Instagram, Linkedin and YouTube.
This one concerns s461(1)(k) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) - the just and equitable winding up remedy - and has the following structure:
1. The law
2. Litigated examples
3. Practical suggestions
Please give James and Coffee and a Case Note a follow on your favourite platform!
2023-09-2959 minCoffee and a Case NoteComments on s66G of the Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW) | A one hour CLE from James d'ApiceIn July and August 2023 James d'Apice gave a series of one hour CLEs "live" on Facebook, Instagram, Linkedin and YouTube.
This one concerns s66G of the Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW) and has the following structure:
1. The law
2. Litigated examples
3. Practical suggestions
Please give James and Coffee and a Case Note a follow on your favourite platform!
2023-09-221h 00Coffee and a Case NoteSunnya Pty Ltd [2023] NSWSC 1104“Hey! That was the Co’s opportunity to sell baby formula!”___A Co that made infant formula had two shareholders: P as to 51%, DCo as to 49%: [1], [2]DCo was controlled by a married couple – D1 and D2 – who had roles including as the Co’s former director and former CEO: [3]P alleged D1 and D2 breached their duties to the Co: [4]P said D1 and D2 caused an opportunity for the Co to promote and distribute a certain brand of infant formula to be diverted away from the Co, and toward entities related to D1, D2 and membe...
2023-09-1907 minCoffee and a Case NoteComments on Partnership Disputes | A one hour CLE from James d'ApiceIn July and August 2023 James d'Apice gave a series of one hour CLEs "live" on Facebook, Instagram, Linkedin and YouTube.
This one concerns the law of partnership and the disputes that arise in that area and has the following structure:
1. The law
2. Litigated examples
3. Practical suggestions
Please give James and Coffee and a Case Note a follow on your favourite platform!
2023-09-1557 minCoffee and a Case NoteBreedon v Oosthuizen [2023] NSWSC 859“Restrain our (former?) partner from competing with us!”___In 2020, the Ps entered into a partnership agreement with D1 to run an accounting practice: [3]In 2022, D1 incorporated D2: [4]Ps wanted the Court’s help to immediately stop D1 and D2 from chasing the Ps’ clients: [5] - [8]The partnership agreement had various restrictions including on partners not trading as accountants for 2 years after the end of the agreement in the relevant area: [46]RE whether the Ps had a prima facie case (the first of the two interloc injunction criteria) the Court gave a (respectfully) excellent summary...
2023-09-1207 minCoffee and a Case NoteComments on Derivative Actions | A one hour CLE from James d'ApiceIn July and August 2023 James d'Apice gave a series of one hour CLEs "live" on Facebook, Instagram, Linkedin and YouTube.
This one concerns s236 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) and has the following structure:
1. The law
2. Litigated examples
3. Practical suggestions
Please give James and Coffee and a Case Note a follow on your favourite platform!
2023-09-0858 minCoffee and a Case NoteComments on Corporate Oppression | A one hour CLE from James d'ApiceIn July and August 2023 James d'Apice gave a series of 5 CLEs "live" on Instagram, Facebook, Linkedin and YouTube.
This one covers corporate oppression pursuant to s232 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) using the structure:
1. The law of corporate oppression
2. Some litigated examples
3. Practical suggestions
Please send James or Coffee and a Case Note a follow on your favourite platform!
2023-09-011h 01Coffee and a Case NotePerkins v Carey [2023] NSWSC 210“That’s my warehouse, or at least half of it is…”___From its purchase in 2010 P and D were registered as 50-50 TiC co-owners of a warehouse. P was D’s parent.P had borrowed the money to buy the property. D operated a business from the property until 2012 when it become non-viable: [4]From 2017 the property was leased with all rental proceeds being paid to D: [7]P commenced proceedings (not by tutor, but following some earlier litigation about P being able to represent P due to P’s Alzheimer’s) seeking orders that D holds their 50...
2023-07-1808 minCoffee and a Case NoteForza Marketing Pty Ltd v Sie [2023] NSWSC 658"This motel ain't big enough for the both of us!"
___
Two families operated a motel together until their relationship deteriorated.
2XD owned the land the motel was operated on and leased it to 1XD, a Co co-owned by 2XD: [2]
2XC had assisted 2XD over the years, and came to assist with the motel: [13] - [17]
The arrangements (for 2XC to help at the motel, and to eventually purchase it from 2XD having paid a deposit) were informal and legally unclear - an arrangement defined by “uncertainty, if not confusion”: [24]
1XC (who...
2023-07-0308 minCoffee and a Case NoteCooke & Ors v Denovan & Ors [2023] QSC 93“You can’t bring your derivative suit; an oppression claim does that job!”___Ps, shareholders in a Co that produced fire collars and similar products for the building industry, sought leave to bring derivative proceedings on behalf of the Co.The relevant IP for the Co was held in a unit trust with TCo as trustee.Each of the Ps and the Ds were shareholders in Co and TCo, and unitholders in the trust: [2]The Ds were directors of Co and TCo.The relationship between the parties began to deteriorate from around 2014, when P1’s e...
2023-06-0606 minCoffee and a Case NoteSRD Property Pty Limited [2023] NSWSC 441“You can have their shares, even though they’re worth nothing!”___P commenced oppression proceedings seeking buyout orders, or a windup.Co1 was owned 50-50 between P and D2, and bought a site for $4.6m: [4]Co2 was owned 50-50 between P and D2, and bought a site for $2.9m: [5]P said they contributed $1.3m to finance and D1 and D2 ~$700K between themselves: [6] Further funds were also contributed to all Cos by both.Co3 was owned 50-50 between P and D2, and agreed to buy a site for $6.1m in future: [7]During the he...
2023-05-1606 minCoffee and a Case NoteChief Commissioner of State Revenue v E Group Security Pty Ltd (No 3) [2023] NSWCA 63“It’s not unreasonable that I rejected your offer!”___A dispute arose about how much tax a Co should have to pay.The dispute related to P’s alleged status as an employment agent: [22], [24]As the matter progressed P made a partial payment in respect of the claimed tax debt and litigation was commenced.In January 2021 D made a Calderbank offer (and not a UCPR offer) to accept about $3.4m for its claim (when it alleged $5.2m was owed): [9]The matter did not settle.In the end, in February 2023 P was ordered to pay P...
2023-05-0507 minCoffee and a Case NoteJames d'Apice interview with Rose Inglis March 2023 - Rose Tinted Law PodcastJames had the chance to sit down with the wonderful Rose Inglis for her Rose Tinted Law podcast the other week!
James (me - I am just writing this and pretending we are a big team) probably revealed more personal stuff, and more TikTok beef stuff, here than ever before.
Enjoy!
And catch Rose here: https://rosetintedlaw.com.au/rtl-the-podcast
2023-03-2148 minCoffee and a Case NoteTrindall v NSW Aboriginal Education Consultative Group [2023] NSWSC 85"Cancel the meeting you've set to remove me!"
___
An association relating to the education of First Nations people, D, planned to convene a meeting to consider removing its president, P. P applied to the Court on an urgent basis to restrain D from doing so: [1]
The meeting was set for a Sunday, P having been provided with very little notice. P approached the Court for an urgent hearing on the Friday beforehand, and the Court made the orders sought: [2]
The president said (i) the meeting was not called in accordance with...
2023-03-0407 minCoffee and a Case NoteZphere Pty Ltd v Pakis [2022] VSC 496A partnership dispute (that I have previously summarised part of) was litigated in large part, then settled: [2]
Before final orders were made, deeds were signed that saw the D pay a sum, surrender their partnership assets, and the proceedings dismissed: [4]
P, a former partner of the partnership then sued D for the same breach: [5]
D said P (1) was bound by the deeds; (2) was estopped due to res judicata; and (3) was bringing a claim which was an abuse of process: [7]
The earlier litigation related to D taking an improper benefit in breach...
2023-02-2211 minCoffee and a Case NoteAmbrus v Buchanan [2022] NSWSC 1628“Sell the land I own 1/56th of!”
___
From the early 1980s a property was owned as tenants in common. Ownership was divided in sevenths: [6]
P owned one 40th of the 5/7th intersect - a 1/56th interest in the land. P sought the appointment of trustees to sell the property pursuant to s66G of the Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW)
Each co-owner had “spheres of influence”. Some constructed residences: [9]
The use was contrary to zoning and no DAs were obtained: [11]
A 5 page “policy” document purported to deal with co-owners’ rights includi...
2023-02-0811 minCoffee and a Case NoteTVED CLE January 2023 - A discussion with James d'Apice and Susanna Lobez about "Shareholder Remedies"James is sometimes invited to give presentations and talks for external legal training providers.
Please enjoy this talk James gives on the distinctions between corporate oppression and derivative actions.
And please don't forget to follow James and Coffee and a Case Note on your favourite platforms!
2023-01-2541 minCoffee and a Case NoteCIP Group Pty Ltd v So [2022] FCA 1490“You said our companies wouldn’t have to pay back those loans!”
___
A group of entities controlled by P (“P”) was in business with a group of entities controlled by D (“D”). P and D did property development work together via various operating Cos (“OpCos”): [3]
P commenced oppression proceedings (s232) saying that D breached their duty to OpCos, and the ACL: [4]
P sought the Court’s leave to bring those derivative claims on behalf of OpCos (s236): [5]
P and D conducted their projects in quasi-partnership: [10]
In around 2019 D made loans to OpCo...
2023-01-2309 minCoffee and a Case NoteThynne v Jevny Pty Limited [2022] NSWSC 1774P lodged a caveat on a property owned by D in Darling Point, Sydney. D sought its removal.
P was the deceased’s son by an earlier marriage. After P’s birth, the deceased married D and they had another child together: [4] - [7]
The deceased operated a cattle and macadamia business on land owned by an entity the deceased and D themselves owned and controlled: [9], [10]
In 2011 the deceased made a will and a Memorandum of Wishes. D counter-signed the latter: [12] - [15]
By the Will the deceased bequeathed the property to D. By t...
2023-01-1606 minCoffee and a Case NoteWalker Corporation Pty Ltd [2022] NSWSC 1609"The vesting date is too early. Rectify the deed!"
___
In 1976 a trust was established: [2]
P and P’s parent signed the deed for Tee: [3]
The trust assets included land in SW Sydney; likely “substantially” exceeding $100m: [5], [20]
The trust vested on the earlier of: a date in 2032, the date of death of a royal family member (“royal lives” clause), or a date determined by the Tee: [7]
The trust’s land might take years to develop, perhaps until 2046: [9], [54]
The deed was amended by Tee various times (in accordance w...
2022-12-2410 minCoffee and a Case NoteAnna Bay Resort Pty Ltd [2022] NSWSC 331“I’m a director.” “No you aren’t.” “Yes, I am!”
___
Two people, and their Cos, founded a Co to develop property on the NSW coast: [1]
P was a director. PCo and DCo were equal shareholders: [37]
Their records could “fairly be described as a mess” with “gaping holes” in the evidence: [3], [11]
The parties agreed that they would share the profits, but disagreed on sharing investment: [175]
The Court found that there was a 50 / 50 agreement, where the party whose “50” required the Co to take a bank loan would cause that bank loan to be paid: [181]
2022-12-1509 minCoffee and a Case NoteKomlotex Pty Ltd v AMP Ltd [2022] NSWSC 1525"Investigation isn't legal advice. You waived privilege!"
___
D discovered ~29K documents in a piece of litigation, and claimed ~9K were privileged: [1] The Court considered 27 representative docs. The docs included docs about an ASIC investigation re “fees for no service” claims: [2]
D had to prove the docs were privileged. If privileged, P had to prove privilege had been waived: [6] D had self-reported the “fees for no service” issue, engaged various large law firms, and itself had a big in-house legal team: [17], [18]
In 2017 D engaged one firm to provide D called findings and advice, claiming...
2022-11-2208 minCoffee and a Case NoteDXC Eclipse Pty Ltd v Wildsmith (No 2) [2022] NSWSC 1330"Stop competing with the business you sold me!"
___
In 2018, P bought a business from the Ds by buying all shares in the Co, ObjectCo, that operated the business from D1 and D2 for $9.5m: [1], [10]
P is a local subsidiary of a multi-national group that sells and installs business software: [2], [3]
ObjectCo sold and installed similar but more complex, pricier software: [4]
ObjectCo’s business was therefore complimentary to, not competitive with, P’s business: [5], [69]
D1 was ObjectCo’s controlling mind. D2 was D1’s company: [8], [9]
The sale contract...
2022-10-2608 minCoffee and a Case NoteAustralian Karting Association Ltd [2022] NSWCA 188A was the national body responsible for go-karting in Australia and trustee of a related trust: [12]
R was responsible for go-karting in NSW and the ACT, and a member of A: [14]
A’s constitution obliged its members to pay on the fees they collected from go-kart drivers in races A approved: [15], [16]
A was Tee of a fund for the construction of new go-kart tracks: [17]
The trust deed empowered A to distribute trust capital and income to benefs, who were its members: [24], [25]
A, as trustee, would loan funds for track co...
2022-10-1308 minCoffee and a Case NoteGillespie Cranes Nominees [2022] NSWSC 1184“A trust law derivative action, or a common law one?”
___
In the early 80s, a trust was established. Its assets came to be worth around $55m: [5]
A parent established the trust for the principal benefit of their spouse and 4 children, with TCo as trustee: [6], [10]
TCo’s shareholders were 2 of the kids - the Ds: [7]
The trust deed gave TCo a wide discretion to make resolutions on the distribution of income. If there was no resolution, the income was to go to the principal beneficiaries. From 2009 to 2020, TCo made no distributions to pri...
2022-09-2308 minCoffee and a Case NoteZong v Lin [2022] NSWCA 136"You made the company pay too much money for that boat!"
___
R owned 55% and A owned 45% of shares in a Co that operated a leisure boat business on Sydney Harbour: [2]
R was the “bank”, contributing funds to the venture. A was to contribute sweat equity, earning a wage while running the Co’s business: [3]
A caused the Co to buy a boat from an entity related to A’s spouse for $315K “as is” with no warranties and no commercial configuration: [4]
A also caused $220K to be transferred out of a Co’s ba...
2022-09-0908 minCoffee and a Case NoteC.V. Joint (Aust) Pty Ltd [2022] NSWSC 981“Get us out, and get a prov liq in!”
___
P, A director and 70% shareholder of a Co sought to have it wound up and a provisional liquidator appointed: [1] - [3]
P brought this application shortly after D1 (P’s former spouse, a Dir, and a 20% shareholder) commenced family law litigation: [20]
D2, D1’s sibling who owned the remaining 10% of the Co’s issued shares, commenced their own shareholder oppression proceedings: [4], [5]
The Co sold car parts, both wholesale and retail: [6]
Appointing a prov liq is a drastic step. It requires t...
2022-08-1806 min
Coffee and a Case NoteWorthington v Hallissy [2022] NSWSC 753“I submit to orders that I have to repay Dad. Or do I…?”
___
Mum and dad - elderly and unwell - sued two of their kids, and their son-in-law.
First, the fascinating procedural issues.
One child and the son-in-law filed submitting appearances. Another child (who we won’t discuss further here) resisted Mum and Dad’s claim and made a cross claim: [1]
During the final hearing, the submitting daughter later sought to withdraw her submitting appearance and actively contest the proceedings: [12]
That daughter had been legally represented at the tim...
2022-06-2106 minCoffee and a Case NoteSCS Super Pty Limited [2022] NSWSC 686"Can we charge a fee for administering the trust?"
___
A trustee sought judicial advice from the Court that it would be justified in amending a super fund trust deed. The proposed change would allow it to charge a fee to be paid from the fund: [38], [44], [67]
(The T’ee sought and was granted non-publication orders in respect of some of its commercial evidence because if it became public it could be exploited by competitors: [14], [55], [56])
The fund, which originally related to educators associated with a specific religion, had around 80K members and $10.5bn un...
2022-06-1507 minCoffee and a Case NoteCampbell v Campbell [2022] NSWSC 554“Does the trustee really own the farm, or it still in mum’s estate?”
___
In the 1970s, Dad - a farm owner - planned to transfer his farm into a trust with TCo as trustee and his family as beneficiaries.
If it worked, his wife and 4 kids could take the benefit of the farm without paying death duties: [78]
At this time, rural families often faced death duties at “confiscatory levels” when farms passed to the next generation: [51]
Dad died in 1976. Mum died in 2017. A number of disputes arose between the sibling...
2022-05-2408 minCoffee and a Case NoteGoo v Sim [2022] NSWSC 420"That money's for the business, not for you!"
___
If you'd like to contact me my please look for James d'Apice or Coffee and a Case Note on your favourite social media spot - I should pop up right away!
___
Ps claimed they paid $160K cash to D in connection with an online payment business: [3]
D said the $110K was appropriately spent on business expenses and D’s salary, and the $50K was for some units in a unit trust: [5]
The parties’ dealings were informal: a lack of docu...
2022-05-1506 minCoffee and a Case NoteCalacoci v Calacoci [2020] NSWSC 4765 partners - 3 Ps and 2 Ds - from the same extended family carried on a partnership. There was no written agreement: [1], [2]
D2 was married to D1: [3]
The partnership business was owning rental property (shops and units) and collecting rent. D1 took a leading role and was a paid a management fee. All partners were paid drawings, controlled by D1: [4] - [6]
Drawings were paid 1/4 to each P, and 1/8 each to D1 and D2: [12]
The partnership was dissolved in 2019. Issues regarding public auction versus “buyout” of the partnership property arose: [13], [14], [17], [18]
The central issue...
2022-04-2510 minCoffee and a Case NoteJames d'Apice interview with Nicole Davidson - Negotiation in Real Life, April 2022I so enjoyed this interview with Nicole Davidson, a gun mediator and host of the Negotiation in Real Life podcast.
Please check it out here: https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/negotiation-in-real-life/id1590259533
2022-04-2141 minCoffee and a Case NoteCappe v Tsung [2018] NSWCA 86(A couple of goofs in my delivery of this one this week - apologies!)
R and 7 As were in partnership operating various diagnostic medical imaging businesses pursuant to a partnership agreement. R and 5 of the As were “full” partners each entitled to 1/7; 2 As were “half” partners entitled to 1/14 each: [3], [31]
The As entered into an agreement with a purchaser to sell the partnership’s assets, with R to receive $3m as part of the purchase: [4]
Clause 32 of the Partnership Agreement dealt with the voting process granting a special majority power to approve on acquisition of the partne...
2022-04-1105 minCoffee and a Case NoteScrivener v Cappello [2021] NSWCA 330“Hey that money belongs to the partnership. Give it back!”
___
C and S, verbally agreed to (i) try to buy some adjoining properties, (ii) sell them at a profit, (iii) share the costs and expenses of doing so equally, and (iv) share the profit equally: [9]
Speaking broadly, S took responsibility for financing and buying the properties, while C looked for purchasers: [14], [55]
S argued the agreement included a Sunset Date, that C would have no interest in the venture if a buyer was not found by a that date: [23]
The prop...
2022-02-2808 minCoffee and a Case NoteSnowy Mountains Grammar School v Adventurer AWD [2022] NSWSC 53P, a school, bought a bus from D. It was old stock sold at a substantial discount.
The Court found D had engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct by silence (as to the build year of the bus) when selling the bus to P. But - crucially - the Court found P did not rely on that misrepresentation: [13]
That meant P lost its claim, despite D’s conduct: [1]
This left open the question of legal costs.
Often “costs follow the event” in litigation: the winner will benefit from an order that the lo...
2022-02-2205 minCoffee and a Case NoteShandong Delisi v Yolarno Pty Ltd [2022] NSWSC 17“The deal’s off. Now give me back my $6m!”
____
P, a Chinese frozen meat company, and D, an Australian feedlot and abattoir company, found themselves in dispute.
A 2015 contractual arrangement required P to pay a $6m “advance payment” to D to acquire 45% of the shares in D: [7]
P made that payment.
The 45% stake was valued ~$140m: [17]
The deal between D and P included unusual conditional terms. The price was $140m, but subject to further negotiation after an investigation procedure including D providing P with audited accounts, P’s board a...
2022-02-0509 minCoffee and a Case NoteCarpenter v Morris [2021] NSWSC 1700If you'd like to contact me my please look for James d'Apice or Coffee and a Case Note on your favourite social media spot - I should pop up right away! (TikTok is one of my strongest suits these days!)
___
Two partners P2 and D4 - both companies - were in partnership from 1996 to 2003. The Ps said that D1 had been paid partnership money and sought an order for the taking of partnership accounts: [2]
The Ps made other claims in relation to alleged subsequent agreements. (But we won’t engage with those.)
The...
2022-01-2213 minCoffee and a Case NoteJames d'Apice presentation at 'The Retreat' 5 November 2021On 5 November 2021 I spoke (remotely) at 'The Retreat' by Clarissa Rayward, the Happy Family Lawyer.
It's a fantastic event and I was delighted to be a part of it. (And am hoping for an invite back next year!)
This is my presentation which I hope brings you value.
A link to just some of Clarissa's fabulous content is here: https://www.thehappyfamilylawyer.com
A link to my appearance on Clarissa's podcast is here: https://www.thehappyfamilylawyer.com/podcast/episode-179-james-dapice/
2021-11-2239 minCoffee and a Case NoteJames d'Apice interview with Brendan Kelso October 2021 - Legalsites Better Law Firm Marketing PodcastEarlier this year, James sat down with Legalsites' founder and law grad turned legal firm marketer, Brendan Kelso. Hope you enjoy their conversation!
A link to the Legalsites website is here: https://legalsites.com.au/social-media-101-w-james-dapice-facebook-instagram-linkedin-tiktok-and-twitter-which-is-best-for-law-firms/
2021-11-0853 minCoffee and a Case NoteJames d'Apice interview with Michael Bromley, Beyond Billables September 2021James had a chance to chat with the legend, Mike Bromley, from Team BB earlier this year.
You can catch what the Beyond Billables team are up to here: https://www.beyondbillables.com
2021-10-271h 13Coffee and a Case NoteCLE James d'Apice interview with TVED's Susanna Lobez - ss236-237 of the Corporations Act and "derivative actions" September 2021In September 2021 James d'Apice spoke with Susanna Lobez from TVED about one of James' pet topics: derivative actions.
You can find TVED's content here: https://www.tved.net.au
2021-10-2530 minCoffee and a Case NoteGearhouse BSI Pty Ltd [2021] NSWSC 98"No trust? No confidence? No company."
___
B and G founded the Co and entered into a shareholders agreement.
The Co provided in-car cameras for race cars to be used in TV broadcasts.
In 2015 the Co agreed to provide cameras for 5 years: 2016 - 2020: [6]
B transferred valuable camera equipment (and later loaned other equipment) to the Co for the Co to use: [9], [60]
At the end of 2020 B wanted to terminate, and G wanted to keep it going: [15]
On termination, B and G had rights to buy back...
2021-10-0607 minCoffee and a Case NoteJames d'Apice interview with Jerome Doraisamy - Lawyers Weekly Podcast September 2021James had the chance to sit down with Jerome Doraisamy in September 2021 to have a fantastic chat about James' views on the profession and his suggestions for other practitioners.
Please check out Laywers Weekly here: https://www.lawyersweekly.com.au/podcast/32455-blending-contemporary-branding-with-traditional-practice-approaches
2021-09-2829 minCoffee and a Case NoteJames d'Apice interview with Anvita Nair - Monash Future Thinkers Podcast August 2021James had a great chat with Anvita Nair of Monash University's Monash Future Thinkers podcast.
Why not check out what Monash Future Thinkers are up to by heading here: https://www.futurethinkers.org.au
2021-09-2126 minCoffee and a Case NoteJames d'Apice interview with Jahan Kalantar - September 2021On 2 September 2021, James sat down on a TikTok Live and spoke with the legendary Jahan Kalantar.
To learn more about Jahan, head here: https://www.jahankalantar.com
2021-09-0657 minCoffee and a Case NoteJames d'Apice interview with Dean Cosgrove - GULS Law Student Podcast June 2021James sat down to speak with Dean Cosgrove of Griffith University Law Society (GULS) in June and had a great chat about how the life of a commercial litigator works.
You can find GULS on LinkedIn here: https://www.linkedin.com/company/griffith-university-law-society
And you can find the GULS Law Student podcast wherever you get your podcasts!
2021-07-2035 minCoffee and a Case NoteJames d'Apice interview with Lucy Dickens - Doing Law Differently Podcast May 2021James spoke with Lucy in 2021 and they had a wide-ranging chat about James' approach to leveraging social media to build a legal practice, and how he feels like the term "innovative" may not necessarily suit him!
We hope you enjoy this fun chat!
You can catch Lucy's podcast everywhere you get your pods and her website is here: https://www.lucydickens.com.au/doing-law-differently/
2021-06-2545 minCoffee and a Case NoteJames d'Apice interview with Damon Laffin - The Young Lawyer Podcast Feb 2021James spoke with Damon Laffin at the Young Lawyer podcast earlier this year and there traversed many topics: James' failures and recoveries, dealing with poisonous partners, his approach to law, and everything in-between.
You can find Damon on LinkedIn here: https://www.linkedin.com/in/damon-laffin-01789942/?originalSubdomain=au
2021-02-1140 minCoffee and a Case NoteJames d'Apice interview with Clarissa Rayward - The Happy Lawyer Happy Life Podcast, April 2020In April 2020 I had an opportunity to have an incredible chat with The Happy Family Lawyer herself, Clarissa Rayward.
We did battle with the very early professional impacts of COVID-19 and some nearby renovations and emerged with a conversation I look back on with great fondness and gratitude.
You can check out Clarissa's fabulous projects, and the community she has built, here: https://www.thehappyfamilylawyer.com
2021-01-191h 10Coffee and a Case NoteJames d'Apice interview with Brendan Kelso - Legalsites, November 2020In November 2020 I sat down for a great chat with Brendan Kelso of Legalsites.
We got into the nitty gritty of my approach, and what steps you might consider using in adopting a similar strategy.
And it was great fun!
You can access Brendan's podcast, and lots of great resources, here: https://legalsites.com.au/podcast/
2021-01-151h 03Coffee and a Case NoteJames d'Apice interview with Grant Williams - Not Just Another Podcast, January 2021I had a great time having an expansive chat with Grant Williams about all things podcasting (and life!) for his new podcast Not Just Another Podcast launched January 2021!
2021-01-111h 49Coffee and a Case NoteTaking It Seriously: Jabs and Right HooksHello there!
This episode is a little different. Today I'm making use of the Gary Vaynerchuck metaphor of "Jab, Jab, Jab, Right Hook" that I am so fond of and am having a chat about a blog post.
It's something I put up on Linkedin earlier in the year that I know a few people have got some value from.
The post is here: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/jabs-right-hooks-james-d-apice/
Hopefully - whether in writing or on the podcast - it brings you some value too. Cheers!
2019-06-3006 min
Coffee and a Case NoteCoffee and a Case Note: The Podcast?I’m Australian lawyer, James d’Apice. I host a video series called “Coffee and a Case Note” where I try to give some value by summarising a recent legal case while sipping a coffee. This podcast is the audio version of that series. I hope you’ll join me!
2019-06-0301 min