Capital Markets partner, Rachael Bassil led the transaction and was assisted by Alastair Corrigall.

More information

For further information on Gilbert + Tobin, please visit www.gtlaw.com.au

Follow us on Twitter @gtlaw

Media contact

Jason Hemens
Media & Communications Manager
Gilbert + Tobin
Tel:       +61 2 9263 4072
Fax:      +61 2 9263 4111
Email: jhemens@gtlaw.com.au

“Our culture is based on innovation and we wanted to reflect this in the way we communicate with candidates. Candidates want engaging content delivered in formats they are familiar with.” says Gilbert + Tobin partner Rachael Bassil.

G+T Careers features a video interview with Managing Partner Danny Gilbert and a first-hand video account of a day in the life of a summer clerk.

“Being able to incorporate video gives a personal touch to the Gilbert + Tobin story. It provides a level of insight into our firm and culture that goes beyond the traditional print-based medium,” says Bassil.

G+T Careers is available internationally for iPad from the iTunes App Store and for Android tablets from Google play. Smartphone versions available soon.

More information

For further information on Gilbert + Tobin, please visit www.gtlaw.com.au

Follow us on Twitter @gtlaw

Media contact

Jason Hemens
Media & Communications Manager
Gilbert + Tobin
Tel: +61 2 9263 4072
Fax: +61 2 9263 4111
Email: jhemens@gtlaw.com.au

Moya is a highly respected partner in Gilbert + Tobin’s competition and regulation group, a director on the Football Federation Australia Board, Chairwoman of the AFC Women’s Committee and a former Matilda’s vice-captain. She was last year named in the Australian Financial Review’s 100 Women of Influence following her role in persuading FIFA to change the ‘hijab’ rule which banned women from playing football while wearing a headscarf.

Earlier this year, Moya was nominated to be the women’s football representative on the FIFA Executive Committee, one of the world’s most powerful sporting bodies. If elected, Moya will be the first woman in history to be elected to a seat at FIFA’s top table.

The vote for the FIFA Executive Committee Female Member will take place at the FIFA Congress in Mauritius on 31 May 2013.

More information

For further information on Gilbert + Tobin, please visit www.gtlaw.com.au

Follow us on Twitter @gtlaw

For further information on Moya’s campaign, visit www.facebook.com/moyadoddfootball or follow her on Twitter @moyadodd

Media contact

Jason Hemens

Media & Communications Manager
Gilbert + Tobin
Tel: +61 2 9263 4072
Fax: +61 2 9263 4111
Email: jhemens@gtlaw.com.au

Quantium is an Australian business that has developed globally renowned customer, market and financial analytics solutions for blue-chip Australian and International organisations.

More information

For further information on Gilbert + Tobin, please visit www.gtlaw.com.au

Follow us on Twitter @gtlaw

Media contact

Jason Hemens
Media & Communications Manager
Gilbert + Tobin
Tel: +61 2 9263 4072
Fax: +61 2 9263 4111
Email: jhemens@gtlaw.com.au

Under a takeover bid implementation deed entered into by the parties, ADM has agreed that it will, subject to satisfactory completion of limited confirmatory due diligence, make an off-market takeover offer to acquire all of the GrainCorp shares not already owned by it for a transaction value of $13.20 per share.  The proposed offer values GrainCorp at $3.4 billion, including GrainCorp’s net debt.

Senior partners John Williamson-Noble and Peter Cook lead the G+T team, supported by partner David Clee and lawyers Tim Gordon, Alex Kauye and Alex Naughton.

Commenting on the transaction, Mr Williamson-Noble said, “GrainCorp is a long standing client of the firm and we are delighted to be advising them on what is a significant transaction in the agribusiness sector.  We are very pleased to have advised the company as it secured materially improved terms as compared to ADM’s initial approach in October 2012, which was priced at $11.75 per share.”

The transaction highlights the firm’s status as a market leading adviser on high-profile regulated corporate transactions.  Other recent examples include Gilbert + Tobin’s key roles on PEP’s acquisition of Spotless by scheme of arrangement ($1.1 billion), Nine Entertainment Co.’s deleveraging transaction by creditors scheme of arrangement ($3.4 billion), Dulux Group’s successful hostile takeover offer of Alesco, Silver Lake Resources’ acquisition of Integra Mining by scheme of arrangement ($426 million), TA Associates’ acquisition of Nintex Group by agreed takeover bid ($219 million) and Crescent Capital’s successful takeover bid for ClearView Wealth ($262 million).

More information

For further information on Gilbert + Tobin, please visit www.gtlaw.com.au

Follow us on Twitter @gtlaw

Media contact

Jason Hemens
Media & Communications Manager
Gilbert + Tobin
Tel: +61 2 9263 4072
Fax: +61 2 9263 4111
Email: jhemens@gtlaw.com.au

Gilbert + Tobin acted for Virgin Australia and Tiger Airways on obtaining informal clearance for the proposed acquisition from the ACCC. 

The Gilbert + Tobin team was led by Competition and Regulation partner Luke Woodward and senior lawyers Charles Coorey and Louise Klamka.

“Gilbert + Tobin is delighted to have been the competition law advisor to both parties in attaining a favourable ACCC outcome.” Luke Woodward said. “The transaction gave rise to a number of complex competition law and economic issues, in particular, the extent to which Virgin Australia’s participation in the Joint Venture would strengthen Tiger Australia and promote competition in the budget travel segment.  These issues were subject to thorough and extensive testing by the ACCC over the last 6 months.  Both the parties are pleased that the ACCC has given now them the opportunity to transform Tiger Australia into a competitive and sustainable low cost carrier.”

More information

For further information on Gilbert + Tobin, please visit www.gtlaw.com.au

Follow us on Twitter @gtlaw

Media contact

Jason Hemens
Media & Communications Manager
Gilbert + Tobin
Tel: +61 2 9263 4072
Fax: +61 2 9263 4111
Email: jhemens@gtlaw.com.au

Managing Partner Danny Gilbert said, “We are delighted that Gina has received this acknowledgement for her expertise and career achievements. Gina will make a valuable contribution in her new capacity and we are proud to have someone of her capability in our partnership.”

Gina is a highly regarded partner in Gilbert + Tobin’s competition and regulation group, consistently ranked one of Australia’s leading competition and regulatory lawyers by Chambers Global and Asia Pacific Legal 500 and named in the Best Lawyers International List.

In 2013, Gina was listed for the fourth time as a “Star Individual” in Chambers for Competition and Antitrust, one of only 10 lawyers in Australia recognised with this status.

More information

For further information on Gilbert + Tobin, please visit www.gtlaw.com.au

Follow us on Twitter @gtlaw

Media contact

Jason Hemens
Media & Communications Manager
Gilbert + Tobin
Tel: +61 2 9263 4072
Fax: +61 2 9263 4111
Email: jhemens@gtlaw.com.au

Among these, six were named as Best Lawyers’ 2013 Lawyer of the Year: 

• Dominic Emmett (Insolvency and Reorganisation)
• John Schembri (Leveraged Buyouts)
• Neil Pathak (Corporate/Governance)
• Peter Cook (Capital Markets: Equity)
• Gina Cass-Gottlieb (Telecommunications)
• Peter Waters (Regulatory)

Managing Partner Danny Gilbert said he was delighted by the strong endorsement of our partners and the quality of the firm.

“Top-tier firms are no longer defined by their size and structure but rather by the quality of the service they provide. These results are a clear example of that.”

More information

For further information on Gilbert + Tobin, please visit www.gtlaw.com.au

Follow us on Twitter @gtlaw
 
Media contact

Jason Hemens
Media & Communications Manager
Gilbert + Tobin
Tel: +61 2 9263 4072
Fax: +61 2 9263 4111
Email: jhemens@gtlaw.com.au

Luke Woodward, partner and head of Gilbert + Tobin’s Competition and Regulation Group said, “We are delighted that Elizabeth’s career achievements and expertise have been recognised in this survey of successful women from around the world.”

Elizabeth has also been recognised as a leading competition lawyer in Australia by external peer and client surveys including the International Who’s Who of Business Lawyers and Euromoney Expert Guides.

More information

For further information on Gilbert + Tobin, please visit www.gtlaw.com.au

Follow us on Twitter @gtlaw

Media contact

Jason Hemens
Media & Communications Manager
Gilbert + Tobin
Tel: +61 2 9263 4072
Fax: +61 2 9263 4111
Email: jhemens@gtlaw.com.au

Gilbert + Tobin is the competition law adviser in Australia to Bertelsmann on the transaction, and worked with Bertelsmann’s global antitrust advisers, Slaughter and May, led by John Boyce and Philippe Chappatte in Europe, Natalie Yeung in Asia, and Cooley in the United States in achieving ACCC clearance.

The Gilbert + Tobin team was led by Competition and Regulation partner Elizabeth Avery, and assisted by Jennifer Sing Key.

“Gilbert + Tobin is pleased to have represented Bertelsmann in assisting to achieve this important step in the path of completing this transaction,” Ms Avery said.

Elizabeth Avery is recognised as a leading competition lawyer in Australia by external peer and client surveys including the International Who’s Who of Business Lawyers and Euromoney Expert Guides. Elizabeth is a Vice Chair of the International Antitrust Committee of the American Bar Association’s Section of International Law, actively involved in many of the Committee’s activities, including speaking and writing on antitrust issues, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region.

Gilbert + Tobin’s Competition and Regulation group is the pre-eminent competition practice in Australia. The team is consistently ranked as the leading competition advisory teams in Australia, receiving the highest rankings in Chambers Asia Pacific (Band 1), Legal 500 (Tier 1), Global Competition Review (Elite) and PLC Which Lawyer (Leading).

More information

For further information on Gilbert + Tobin, please visit www.gtlaw.com.au

Follow us on Twitter @gtlaw

Media contact

Jason Hemens
Media & Communications Manager
Gilbert + Tobin
Tel: +61 2 9263 4072
Fax: +61 2 9263 4111
Email: jhemens@gtlaw.com.au

It is the other aspect of the Government’s intervention that is both unusual and unprecedented: specifically, the linkage of the broad scheme of regulation of print media to privacy law.

Journalism by individual media organisations in Australia has always enjoyed an exemption from the operation of the Privacy Act 1988 where those media organisations are publicly committed to observing standards that deal with privacy (section 7B of the Act).  Media organisations have been permitted to either adhere to their own written standards or to adhere to standards set by a body representing a class of media organisations.
 
Traditional print media (newspapers and magazines) has in recent years self-regulated as to privacy through the Statement of Privacy Principles and General Principle 4: Respect for Privacy and Sensibilities of the General Statement of Principles published by the Australian Press Council (APC) and administered through the complaints and adjudication processes of the Australian Press Council.  Print media self-regulation administered by the APC covers many things unrelated to privacy, such as truth, balance, impartiality and fairness, corrections of inaccuracies, honest and fair investigation and preservation of confidences.

Traditional electronic media (free to air television and pay television) have self-regulated through Codes of Practice developed by the industry and as reviewed, registered and overseen by the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA).  The ACMA has also determined its own Privacy Guidelines for Broadcasters which the ACMA applies in administering complaints as to any non-compliance by broadcasters with these Codes of Practice.  ACMA’s powers of enforcement of these Codes are significant.  The Codes and Guidelines together constitute what is now quite a prescriptive scheme of regulation of privacy in traditional electronic media, including a regulatory concept of serious invasion of personal privacy that is applied by the ACMA in determining complaints about privacy excesses in television news and current affairs reporting. 

New media – blogs, online newspapers and other internet media outlets – is not so self-regulated.  New media accordingly is potentially subject to the full operation of the Privacy Act 1988, except to the extent that particular new media outlets that are media organisations engaged in journalism publicly commit to observing journalistic standards that deal with privacy.  Some new media outlets have published statements and complaints procedures that could be regarded as so complying.  In 2012 probably the best known new media journalism outlet, Crikey, elected to join the APC.

Where a complaint about content of a newspaper or a magazine within the coverage of the APC cannot be resolved without formal adjudication of the complaint by the APC, the publisher is required to publish the Council’s adjudication in the newspaper or a magazine, promptly and with due prominence.  The Council cannot require a correction or apology to be published: in the event that the matter is not resolved and proceeds to final adjudication, the Council may only require publication of the Council’s adjudication promptly and with due prominence. 

The APC currently receives more than 450 complaints each year.  About 75% of initiated complaints which are fully pursued by the complainant result in agreement for a correction, apology or some other agreed form of action.

The limited powers and sanctions of the Australian Press Council have proven to be controversial in recent years.  These powers and sanctions were the subject of well publicised recommendations for reform made by both the Independent Inquiry into the Print Media chaired by The Hon. Ray Finkelstein QC and commonly referred to as the Finkelstein Inquiry, and the Convergence Review Committee.  These bodies reported early in 2012.  The media reform package now introduced into the Federal Parliament is the Australian Government’s first public response to the recommendations of those review bodies.  In the meantime, one prominent media proprietor, the owner of The West Australian, elected to disagree with interventions by the APC and struck out alone to set up its own Council, the Independent Media Council.

Criticisms of traditional print media self-regulation to date have generally not focussed upon allegations of breaches of privacy.  For example, the ALRC’s 2008 Report had already considered the journalism exemption from the Privacy Act and concluded that there should be an “adequacy” criterion added to the qualified exemption.  As stated by the ALRC, “[e]nforcement powers and sanctions are an important consideration to determine whether a particular media privacy standard is ‘adequate’ for the purposes of the journalism exemption.” However, there did not appear to have been a substantial unmet need for more vigorous privacy enforcement in Australian print media.  Of complaints made about the Australian print media to the APC, complaints about invasion of personal privacy have (for so long as statistics have been made available by the APC) constituted a remarkably small percentage.  For example, In 2010-2011 (the most recent year for which statistics are available), of a total of 566 complaints to the APC, only 30 complaints related to intrusion of privacy.  Of the 85 complaints in that year to the APC that were not resolved and proceeded to adjudication, only 3 related to intrusion on privacy. 

So the privacy focus of provisions of the News Media (Self-Regulation) Bill 2013 is intriguing.  What is that privacy focus?  The Bill operates as follows:

• The News Media (Self-regulation) Bill 2013 and the News Media (Self-regulation) (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2013 are directed at print media and associated online services rather than the television industry and associated online services.  The Bills if enacted would affect ‘news media organisations’, defined by reference to ‘news or current affairs activities’, but expressly exempting (1) activities relating to material disseminated by a licensed broadcasting service, and (2) activities relating to material disseminated by an online service that is associated with a licensed broadcasting service. 
• The legislative package would not affect regulation of the television industry through Codes of Practice and associated regulation under the Broadcasting Services Act as administered by the ACMA.  The ACMA would continue to regulate broadcasting activities and enforce industry Codes through use of the ACMA’s existing suite of powers and sanctions.  The ACMA’s powers of enforcement of these Codes are significant and would remain unchanged.  As already noted, the ACMA has determined its own Privacy Guidelines for Broadcasters which the ACMA applies in administering complaints as to any non-compliance by broadcasters with privacy-related provisions of these Codes.
• The Bills would have the effect that a specified ‘news media organisation’ would only continue to qualify for the ‘journalism’ exemption from the Privacy Act if the organisation was a member of a declared ‘news media self-regulation body’ and has not had its rights as a member suspended. 
• The new Public Interest Media Advocate (the PIMA) as appointed by the Government under the associated Public Interest Media Advocate Bill 2013 would have the power to declare a ‘news media self-regulation body’.  That power requires the PIMA to consider various matters specified in clause 7(3) of the Bill, which include the extent to which the body’s news media self-regulation scheme provides for remedial action to be taken by the body corporate, including the power to give remedial directions (including a direction to publish an apology or a correction) to a news media organisation.  This is an entirely new requirement: the APC does not have such powers today.
• The PIMA would also have the power to revoke any declaration of a news media self-regulation body.  The Government states that contemplates that this power of revocation could be exercisable if a news media self-regulation body failed to suspend an organisation for failure to comply with the news media self-regulation body’s rules and determinations.  The effect of any such revocation would be to leave relevant organisations that were no longer covered by a declared news media self-regulation body (whether because they were suspended by the news media self-regulation body for infraction of its rules, which infraction might be related to any matter covered by the rules, or because the PIMA revoked the declaration of the media self-regulation body) subject to the operation of the Privacy Act. 

Could a media organisation engage in journalism without availability of the journalism exemption?  Probably not: availability of this exemption is critical to news gathering and current affairs.  Investigative journalism would be severely hampered, if not made impossible, if a number of the National Privacy Principles (NPPs) applied to a media organisation.  These include:

• A right for a person to access personal information held by an organisation about the person and to correct inaccuracies (NPP 6).
• A requirement for an organisation that collects personal information about an individual from someone other than the individual to take reasonable steps to ensure that the individual is aware of this, either at the time of collection or as soon as is practicable after collection, and also made aware of (among other things) the fact that he or she is able to gain access to the information, the purposes for which the information is collected, and other organisations to whom this information may be disclosed (NPP 1.3 and 1.5).
• Restrictions as to trans-border data flows of personal information (NPP 9) could significantly hamper syndication and other news sharing arrangements.
• Requirements as to data quality (ensuring that personal information retained is accurate, complete and up-to-date) (NPP 3) and limits as to the period of retention of personal information beyond the period for which it was reasonably necessary to retain it for the purpose for which it was collected could significantly hamper retention of backgrounders in newsroom libraries.

In addition, media organisations would become subject to the jurisdiction of the Australian Privacy Commissioner in relation to findings that an act or practice was an interference with the privacy of an individual.  Among new penalties and sanctions which will come into effect (under already enacted laws) from March 2014, the Australian Privacy Commissioner may require a party to give enforceable undertakings and may make remedial orders in respect of a party.

So is the Australian Government’s media regulation reform package an unprecedented and fundamental attack upon the freedom of the media in Australia, as some media outlets have claimed?  It is certainly true that freedom of speech in Australia rests on narrow foundations, in the absence of a constitutional basis for freedom of speech outside the judge-made law around the implied constitutional guarantee of freedom of political communication and the indirect protection of human rights through Australia’s accession to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.  But regardless of freedom of speech concerns, the unusual and unprecedented aspect of the media regulation reform package is the linkage of the entire scheme of print media regulation to the journalism exemption from privacy law.  As already noted, current standards and most complaints addresses things unrelated to privacy, such as truth, balance, impartiality and fairness, corrections of inaccuracies, honest and fair investigation and preservation of confidences.   On statistics to date, over 90% of complaints that might lead to unremedied infractions of standards might be expected to be completely unrelated to privacy.  So is the linkage of the general scheme of media regulation to privacy law proportionate and reasonable?

In this context, the current vociferous debate in the print media about the Australian Government’s media regulation reform package is not unexpected.  What is unexpected is that the former backwater of media privacy law should be thrust into national prominence in this way.

Gilbert + Tobin’s integrated Corporate Advisory and Tax & Stamp Duty practice is recognised as a leader in the Australian market. Our partners are consistently ranked as leaders in their field by clients, peers and legal directories such as Chambers, Best Lawyers and Legal 500.

Gilbert + Tobin’s Corporate Advisory team has been involved in many of Australia’s market-shaping transactions in the last ten years and regularly advises the largest companies and private equity houses in Australia.

More information

For further information on Gilbert + Tobin, please visit www.gtlaw.com.au

Follow us on Twitter @gtlaw

Media contact

Jason Hemens
Media & Communications Manager
Gilbert + Tobin
Tel: +61 2 9263 4072
Fax: +61 2 9263 4111
Email: jhemens@gtlaw.com.au

Managing Partner Danny Gilbert said, “This is a great honour for Gilbert + Tobin as it reflects the opinion of our clients based on their experiences with the firm. This is always the most important judging panel.”

The winners are determined through an extensive survey of buyers of professional services conducted by Beaton Consulting. Respondents rated firms on a range of attributes such as innovation, market leadership, value for money, client care and service quality. It is the largest study of professional services firms globally, with more than 40,000 respondents.

More information

For further information on Gilbert + Tobin, please visit www.gtlaw.com.au

Follow us on Twitter @gtlaw

Media contact

Jason Hemens
Media & Communications Manager
Gilbert + Tobin
Tel: +61 2 9263 4072
Fax: +61 2 9263 4111
Email: jhemens@gtlaw.com.au

The app is designed to revolutionise and simplify the way lawyers, in-house counsel and other telecommunications professionals work.

“This is a heavily regulated industry – lawyers through to commercial managers need to be able to quickly reach for the relevant Telco rules. Rather than navigating a maze of websites and hard copy materials, for one of over 300 or so documents the Telco Navigator holds all the documents in one place saving valuable time by reducing hours spent browsing or researching,” says Gilbert + Tobin telecommunications regulatory partner Peter Waters.

“One of the apps greatest advantages is that the document library can be accessed at any time and any location, including while offline. It will also update while you sleep.”

“It may not be as popular as Angry Birds, but we hope it will make life much easier for people in the Telco industry.”

The electronic bookshelf is cloud-based, which allows Gilbert + Tobin to push updates to users automatically. The application also features interactive diagrams, related useful links, and a lawyer expertise search tool.
The iPad app is available through Apple’s App Store free of charge – click here.

More information

For further information on Gilbert + Tobin, please visit www.gtlaw.com.au

Follow us on Twitter @gtlaw

Media contact

Jason Hemens
Media & Communications Manager
Gilbert + Tobin
Tel: +61 2 9263 4072
Fax: +61 2 9263 4111
Email: jhemens@gtlaw.com.au

Gina Cass-Gottlieb was named winner for the Competition category in Australia. She has advised on some of the largest, most contentious and complex merger clearance matters for acquisitions and joint ventures in Australia and New Zealand. She has also successfully represented clients in complex investigations and prosecutions by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission for collusive, predatory, misleading, deceptive and other prohibited conduct.

Gina is known for achieving commercial results through creative solutions and perseverance, even when previous applications for clearance or dispute resolution have been refused. To view Gina’s biography, please click here.

Managing Partner Danny Gilbert said, “We are delighted that Dianne and Gina have received these prestigious awards. This is a great acknowledgement for Gilbert + Tobin’s ongoing commitment to client service.”

The ILO Client Choice Award winners for 2013 were chosen from more than 2,000 nominations received worldwide. The nominations were individual assessments completed by senior corporate counsel to recognise those law firms and partners around the world that stand apart for excellent client care and quality of service. The criteria for the awards focus on law firms’ ability to add real value to their clients’ business above and beyond the other players in the market.

More information

For further information on Gilbert + Tobin, please visit www.gtlaw.com.au

Follow us on Twitter @gtlaw

Media contact
Jason Hemens
Media & Communications Manager
Gilbert + Tobin
Tel: +61 2 9263 4072
Fax: +61 2 9263 4111
Email: jhemens@gtlaw.com.au