The Supreme Court has found two Canberra lawyers tried to deter a former partner from pursuing contractual benefit programs.
Erin Taylor took Aulich Civil Law partners Benjamin Aulich and Peter Woodhouse to the ACT Supreme Court, seeking $500,000 she paid to buy 25 per cent of the civil law firm's shares in 2019.
Mr Woodhouse placed the firm into voluntary administration in September 2024, in what acting Justice Balla found was a decision made for himself and Mr Aulich to "obtain an advantage in this litigation".
3 sentences from our version of the report,
chosen to cover it. Nothing here is written; every line is in the article below.
How
Headline check
The one thing this headline claims is in the report.
Figures, names and quoted words in the headline, looked for in the report itself — not in the summary above. One claim in this headline could be checked, so this is a narrow pass and not a thorough one. How this is checked
The article, shortened and in plain language
The Supreme Court has found two Canberra lawyers tried to deter a former partner from pursuing contractual benefit programs.
Erin Taylor successfully argued she was owed a refund or buyback of shares she had bought in the law firm.
The court is set to issue orders and determine costs at a later date.
Erin Taylor took Aulich Civil Law partners Benjamin Aulich and Peter Woodhouse to the ACT Supreme Court, seeking $500,000 she paid to buy 25 per cent of the civil law firm's shares in 2019.
In a decision published this month, Acting Justice Audrey Balla found Mr Woodhouse and Mr Aulich "embarked on a campaign" to deter Ms Taylor from pursuing her contractual benefit programs.
Mr Woodhouse placed the firm into voluntary administration in September 2024, in what acting Justice Balla found was a decision made for himself and Mr Aulich to "obtain an advantage in this litigation".
According to the decision, a meeting in a cafe about workloads between Ms Taylor and Mr Aulich in February 2024 ended abruptly, with Mr Aulich Ms Taylor to "get f***ed and f*** off" while he raised his middle finger at her.
Shortened to 1 minute
of reading, this version reads 5.9 on the Niral Score.
You are reading our version, not theirs.
This is ABC News's report shortened to its most important sentences, in plainer words, with
verdicts and loaded words taken out. Plain description stays, and so do adjectives
that carry a fact, such as "former" or "federal". The reporting, the facts and the quotations
are theirs — quotations are never edited — and the indicators beside it measure
this version. Hover or tap Adjectives to see every one left in the text.
How this outlet filed it, and how we rewrote it
No other newsroom we read has filed on this event, so there is nothing to compare it with yet.
This story is about a matter before the courts. Comments are closed on those, because what is written under them can prejudice a trial or damage somebody who has been charged with nothing.
If something here is wrong, tell us — that we do read.