In Part 2 of our climate reporting series, we build on the themes from Episode 50 and shift the focus to what comes next.

As the first wave of disclosures has wrapped up, attention has turned to the next climate reporting cycles - particularly for June and September year-end companies. The question now is: what lessons can organisations take forward?

In this episode, we unpack key takeaways from the first round of sustainability reporting and explore how they can be applied in practice for future reporters. We also take a closer look at ASIC’s early observations and share our perspective on what these mean, and how companies can consider them going forward.

Welcome back to The Third Wheel. In this episode, we turn our attention to one of the new features of the annual reporting landscape: mandatory climate disclosures.

With the first wave of reporting now completed, we thought it was the perfect moment to pause and reflect. What’s working well? Where are organisations still finding their footing? And what challenges are starting to surface?

This episode kicks off a two-part series, where we explore early trends emerging from the first round of disclosures. We share our initial observations, highlight recurring hurdles or challenges, and point to areas where reporting is already showing real progress.

In this episode of Inside Employment, Natalie Gaspar and Lucy Boyd are joined by HSF Kramer Disputes Partner, Melissa Gladstone to explore the rise of employment class actions in Australia and why they have become one of the fastest-growing litigation risks for employers.

Natalie, Lucy and Melissa discuss the factors driving this trend, how employment class actions differ from traditional workplace disputes, and the unique challenges they create for employers. They also share practical steps organisations can take to mitigate risk, including governance, early issue detection and prompt remediation.

In this episode of Deal Talk, partners Kam Jamshidi and Nicole Pedler examine the Dexus vs Australia Pacific Airports Corporation litigation, which has firmly brought into focus how divesting parties manage confidentiality obligations in a sale process.

Analysing the key lessons from Justice Hammerschlag's judgment in the NSW Supreme Court, Kam and Nicole work through the key issues arising from the case, including:

• The scale of disclosure and why the nature of the recipients made the breach so serious

• Why Justice Hammerschlag found the breach to be both material and irremediable, and what the breakdown of trust and confidence between joint venture parties means in practice

• The role of the board in issuing the default notice and the drafting considerations that flow from that; and

• The practical lessons for transactors, from coding for exit at the joint venture formation stage, to applying more staged, carefully controlled information disclosure in sale processes

In this episode of On Just Terms, partners Jason Betts and Melissa Gladstone sit down with Dr Peter Cashman, adjunct professor at UNSW and leading barrister, to discuss the evolution of Australia’s class action regime.

Drawing on decades of experience, Dr Cashman reflects on its role in improving corporate governance, product safety and access to justice, while addressing ongoing challenges around cost, delay and efficiency. He also outlines a range of reforms aimed at creating a faster, fairer and more effective class action system for all participants.

In this episode, we step back from our case study (covered in Episode 1 Parts One and Two) to address a key question: how does GenAI compare to technology-assisted review (TAR)?

David Beck (Head of eDiscovery UK & EMEA), Meghan Ryan (Senior Manager, eDiscovery) and Danbee Kim (Head of Digital Legal, US) cut through the hype to explore how these technologies work in practice. They examine why TAR remains central to large-scale review - particularly for precision, consistency and defensibility - and where GenAI adds value, including contextual insight and early case analysis.

Drawing on real-world experience, they show why GenAI is often reinforcing (not replacing) TAR, and reframe the debate around a more practical question: what is the right approach for the matter, the data and the client?

This is the third episode of "Cross-examining AI", HSF Kramer's podcast series on disputes and AI where we unpack the key developments that are shaping litigation. In this episode we look at the use of AI by public bodies following a recent judgment on the lawfulness of the Metropolitan Police’s live facial recognition technology, as well as discussing some of the key IP issues that AI developers and users are currently confronting. This episode is hosted by Martin Hevey, a senior associate in our disputes team, who is joined by Andrew Lidbetter and Jasveer Randhawa from our public law and regulatory team, and Peter Dalton, a partner in the cyber security and IP practices.

Below you can find links to our blog posts on the developments and cases covered in this podcast.

• Civil Justice Council publishes update on consultation responses regarding use of AI for preparing court documents https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/litigation/2026-07/civil-justice-council-publishes-update-on-consultation-responses-regarding-use-of-ai-for-preparing-court-documents

• Lessons for AI use by public authorities in Divisional Court’s decision on lawfulness of facial recognition technology https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/publiclaw/lessons-for-ai-use-by-public-authorities-in-divisional-courts-decision-on-lawfulness-of-facial-recognition-technology

In this July wrap up edition of the public law podcast, Jasveer Randhawa is joined by HSF Kramer partners Nusrat Zar and James Wood. They start with an update on ECHR and proportionality, examining recent developments in A1P1 property rights, following the decisions in Dana Astra and BYL. The discussion then turns to practical takeaways for those advising on contentious regulatory matters, including the High Court’s refusal of permission to challenge a late application in Intelligent Land Investments Group, and the evidential threshold required when seeking to restrain the publication of public authority decisions in Euro Car Parks Ltd and South East Water. They also examine the courts’ evolving approach where regulators overstep, as illustrated by R (University of Sussex) v Office for Students, alongside recent High Court guidance on the correct test to be applied in energy price control appeals. To conclude, they flag the Divisional Court's decision on the lawfulness of facial recognition technology and the useful lessons it holds for the future use of AI by public authorities.

Speakers: Jasveer Randhawa (Knowledge Counsel), Nusrat Zar (Partner), and James Wood (Partner).

This podcast focuses on dawn raids and how businesses can prepare for and respond to them. Dawn raids are unannounced inspections carried out by regulatory and investigative authorities to gather evidence of suspected legal breaches. In this episode, we discuss: 1) what dawn raids are and the authorities that conduct them; 2) recent trends in dawn raid activity, including the growing challenges posed by electronic data and hybrid working; and 3) the key steps companies and employees should take before, during and after a dawn raid to ensure compliance and protect their legal position.

Speakers: Dawen Gao, Tianxin Sun

这一期我们将重点讨论黎明突袭（Dawn Raids）以及企业应如何应对此类调查。黎明突袭是监管机构或执法机关为调查涉嫌违法违规行为而开展的未经预先通知的现场检查。在本期节目中，我们将围绕以下三个方面展开讨论：1）首先，我们将介绍什么是黎明突袭，以及哪些监管和执法机构有权开展此类检查；2）其次，我们将探讨近年来黎明突袭的发展趋势，包括电子数据管理和远程办公模式带来的新挑战；3）最后，我们将分享企业和员工在黎明突袭前、黎明突袭期间及结束后应采取的关键应对措施，以确保合规并维护自身合法权益。

Speakers: 高达文，孙田心

Changes to workplace harassment laws – steps employers should take to prepare

In this fifth episode of the Employment Espresso Pods mini-series on the Employment Rights Act 2025, Jenny Andrews and Sian McKinley, both Of Counsel, together with Knowledge Counsel Anna Henderson, focus on the changes to the law on harassment due to come into force in October 2026. These reforms extend the new preventative duty first introduced in October 2024, turning it into a duty to take "all reasonable steps" to prevent sexual harassment, and also create the potential for employees to bring claims against their employer in relation to any type of unlawful harassment by a third party. We discuss the steps employers in different sectors should take now to minimise the risk of claims.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission's technical guidance dated 2024 referred to in the podcast is available here: https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/guidance/sexual-harassment-and-harassment-work-technical-guidance; the Commission's latest research is here: https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/our-work/our-research/our-research-workplace-harassment.