Explore real-world examples of how Pentana Stanton Lawyers has successfully represented clients across a wide range of legal matters. These case summaries provide insight into our legal approach, outcomes achieved, and the depth of experience our team brings to every matter. Each summary is anonymised to protect client confidentiality while offering a transparent look into our firm’s capability and dedication.
![Professional lawyer in a corporate office setting representing Pentana Stanton Lawyers, accompanying the High Court case summary of Unions NSW v State of NSW [2023] HCA 4, which examined electoral expenditure caps and freedom of political communication in Australia.](https://0b442dd2.delivery.rocketcdn.me/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/ChatGPT-Image-Jun-20-2025-02_24_26-PM-768x1152.webp)
In Unions NSW v State of NSW [2023] HCA 4, the High Court struck down a key provision of the NSW Electoral Funding Act, ruling that the cap on third-party campaigners’ electoral spending
![Photograph of the High Court of Australia, symbolising the landmark ruling in Self Care v Allergan [2023] HCA 8, which clarified trade mark use and misleading conduct under Australian law, featured by Pentana Stanton Lawyers.](https://0b442dd2.delivery.rocketcdn.me/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/ChatGPT-Image-Jun-20-2025-02_16_58-PM-768x1152.webp)
The High Court’s decision in Self Care v Allergan [2023] HCA 8 provides critical clarification on trade mark infringement, deceptive similarity, and misleading conduct in advertising. The Court ruled that descriptive phrases like
![High Court of Australia building — BA v The King [2023] HCA 14 co-tenancy rights case summary](https://0b442dd2.delivery.rocketcdn.me/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/High-Court-of-Australia-–-Case-Summary-BA-v-The-King-2023-HCA-14-Pentana-Stanton-Lawyers-768x1152.webp)
In BA v The King [2023] HCA 14, the High Court of Australia delivered a pivotal ruling on the rights of co-tenants after a relationship breakdown. This landmark decision clarified that a co-tenant
In a groundbreaking ruling, the Supreme Court of Victoria has declared Bitcoin as “property” under Australian law, aligning the country with global standards on cryptocurrency. This landmark decision not only clarifies the legal
The High Court of Australia’s landmark decision in Bird v DP [2024] HCA 41 reshapes the landscape of vicarious liability and institutional accountability for historical child sexual abuse. This case probes whether religious
“In prioritising the children’s welfare during a time of transition, the Court held that stability in education is paramount. In the absence of compelling evidence for change, and with the children thriving in
“The Court balanced fairness with practicality in navigating a multi-jurisdictional property settlement, confirming that post-separation inheritances may be treated as distinct from the divisible asset pool. A holistic approach, grounded in contributions and
“In determining whether a foreign divorce should be recognised, the Court must assess compliance with the issuing country’s legal process and whether any party was denied natural justice. In this case, the Pakistani
Melbourne Office
Level 3 & 5,
552 Lonsdale Street,
Melbourne VIC 3000
Dandenong Office
Suite 9 (Level 1),
50-54 Robinson St,
Dandenong VIC 3175
(03) 900 22 800
reception@pstanton.com.au
