Vince Murano

• Class Actions
• Commercial Law
• Competition
• Equity
• Professional Negligence
• Public Law

Vince has substantial experience in commercial and public law.

Vince’s broad-ranging areas of practice include corporations and corporate insolvency, contracts, trusts, real and personal property, professional liability, wills and estates, bankruptcy and judicial review.  His experience extends to the application of international law in those areas.

Vince has acted in complex multi-party disputes in various Australian courts.

Vince enjoys acting for a diverse range of clients including large companies, small businesses, professional consultants, liquidators, trustees, individuals with personal disputes and government agencies.

Before coming to the Bar, Vince worked at Clayton Utz and was a Senior Associate in the Commercial Litigation and Insolvency Group.  Prior to practising as a solicitor, Vince worked in law enforcement and regulatory roles for the Commonwealth (predominantly fraud investigations).

Vince read with Robert Craig KC.

Some matters in which Vince has been briefed since coming to the Bar include:

• Melbourne Property Group Investments (MPGI) Pty Ltd as trustee for the MPGI Trust v Knight 43 Martin Street Pty Ltd [2022] VSC 41 – Supreme Court of Victoria – with M Peckham.  The parties were in dispute over the interpretation of a joint venture agreement, loan agreement and related guarantee.
• Kempson v Haydon & Anor [2022] VSC 30 – Supreme Court of Victoria – led by Leslie Glick KC.  Application to construe a will where the beneficiaries were in dispute as to whether the testatrix owned property she sought to bequeath.
• BD78 Pty Ltd v FGK3GEN Pty Ltd [2022] VSC 361 – Supreme Court of Victoria – unled.  Application to remove a caveat lodged by an equitable mortgagee in circumstances where the mortgagor was in default and contested the extent of its liability to pay interest.
• Byrne v Plasztan [2023] VCC 2189; Byrne v Plasztan [2023] VCC 2397 – County Court of Victoria – unled.  Successfully defended common intention constructive trust claim over real property, and alternative claim for contribution and an account.  Indemnity costs awarded against plaintiff.
• Business Service Brokers Pty Ltd v Optus Mobile Pty Ltd & Ors – Supreme Court of Victoria – led by David Collins KC and Damien McAloon.  A contractual interpretation and consumer law dispute involving Optus and a former dealer of its telecommunications products.
• Chang v Chang; Chang v Chang; Chang v Gu – Supreme Court of Victoria – unled.  The three interrelated proceedings involve claims of resulting trusts, constructive trusts, and breach of fiduciary duty.
• In the matter of the Will and Estate of Emanuela Casaccio, deceased – Supreme Court of Victoria – unled.  Application to construe will and associated agreements.
• JC Jarol Pty Ltd & Anor v Novamex International LLC – Supreme Court of Victoria – led by Robert Craig KC (leave to amend reasons J.C. Jarol Pty Ltd & Anor v Novamex International LLC [2023] VSC 232).  A distributor of soft drinks alleged unconscionable conduct by the manufacturer in the context of an exclusive distribution agreement.
• Italy in A Glass Pty Ltd v Viticoltori Ponte SRL – Federal Court – unled.  A distributor of alcoholic products alleged the Italian company counterparty repudiated an exclusive distribution agreement and engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct.
• Destination Media Australia Pty Ltd & Anor v Fitness and Lifestyle Group Topco Pty Ltd & Ors – Supreme Court of Victoria – led by Robert Craig KC.  The dispute related to the terms on which shares had been acquired.
• Mooney & Anor v Mooney – Supreme Court of Victoria – unled.  A dispute over whether real property was owned by an individual or by a partnership, and whether the partnership ought to be wound-up.
• Mediratta v Clark [2019] VSC 685 – Supreme Court of Victoria – unled.  The plaintiffs alleged breaches of a contract for the sale of land, including whether an implied term existed permitting access to undertake valuation.
• Pekar v Holden (Trustee) (No 3) [2019] FCA 1928 and Pekar v Jess (Trustee) [2020] FCA 1250 – Federal Court – unled.  The proceeding involved breach of contract, the removal of a trustee in bankruptcy, and the loss of indemnity by a trustee in bankruptcy.

Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards legislation. The information referred to above has been supplied by the barrister concerned. Neither Victorian Bar Inc nor the barrister's clerk have independently verified the accuracy or completeness of the information and neither accepts any responsibility in that regard.