Aptum Legal

Aptum Legal Experts in complex Litigation

02/09/2026

Has the graduate program helped shape your career path? We asked Nicholas Gibson and Claire Boulter.

Neither came in with one set career goal. Both came out with a clearer picture of how to get there.

The common thread? Exposure and trust. Being given responsibility above and beyond your experience level. Working on things you wouldn't see at most firms. And being trusted to do work that accelerates your skills as a litigator.

Not everyone in the program is heading in the same direction. But Aptum gives graduates a clearer view of the pathways available and how to reach them.

Applications for the Aptum Legal Graduate Program are now open.

Apply here: https://aptumlegal.com.au/careers/graduate-program/

26/08/2026

What's it actually like going through the Aptum graduate program? We asked Nicholas Gibson and Claire Boulter.

Real responsibility and exposure from early on. The opportunity to work closely with different lawyers and understand their approaches. Training and supervision when you need it, with the trust to go beyond it when you show you're ready.

In a smaller, selective team, every person brings something different. That exposure to different working styles has been one of the program's biggest benefits.

Applications for the Aptum Legal Graduate Program are now open. The link is in the comments.

25/08/2026

What's it actually like going through the Aptum graduate program? We asked Nicolas Gibson and Claire Boulter.

Real responsibility and exposure from early on. The opportunity to work closely with different lawyers and understand their approaches. Training and supervision when you need it, with the trust to go beyond it when you show you're ready.

In a smaller, selective team, every person brings something different. That exposure to different working styles has been one of the program's biggest benefits.

Applications for the Aptum Legal Graduate Program are now open.
https://aptumlegal.com.au/careers/graduate-program/

20/08/2026

The other side is insured. Great news, right? Not exactly.

Aptum associate Tim Wilkinson's latest hot take? Sure, there might be a pot of gold at the end. But getting there is going to be painful.

Insurers have money, but they don't care what they spend defending the case or compensating you. They're slower to engage, harder to deal with, and have far less skin in the game than a privately paying party who feels every dollar.

So feel slightly better that there's money there. But don't feel that much better. It just changes the nature of the suffering.

Agree? Disagree? Tim wants to hear it.

18/08/2026

Not 100% better. Just 50% better every day.

In this conversation between Nigel Evans and Aptum associate Christine Turkington, Christine talks about her approach to discipline and habit creation. The key? Keep it small. Keep it realistic.

Something as simple as spending five minutes at the end of the day going through your tasks. If that doesn't work, move it to the morning. The flexibility is built into making the habit small enough that it actually sticks.

A great approach, particularly when you're facing what sometimes feels like an overwhelming sea of things.

13/08/2026

Negligence sounds simple. It's a trap.

Aptum associate Tim Wilkinson's latest hot take? The easiest way to ruin a straightforward building defect case is to claim negligence.

It sounds appealing. You don't need to have directly contracted with whoever you're suing. Just show someone made a mistake and caused damage. But the moment you plead negligence, the floodgates open. Contributory negligence. Apportionment. Contribution claims. Every trade that set foot on the site gets joined in. And the insurers make your life hell.

If you've got a straightforward case and can plead a strict contractual duty that the works had to be fit for purpose or the products had to be right, do that. Keep it tight. Keep it focused.

Negligence can suck you into a nightmare world of litigation when a simpler path was sitting right there.

Agree? Disagree? Tim wants to hear it.

11/08/2026

The ATO just issued an amended assessment for $1.2 million plus penalties. Your accountant hasn't dealt with anything this size. Where do you start?

The first step is understanding why the decision feels wrong. And which parts.

Is it the entire assessment? Is it the way the ATO has applied the law? Is it certain facts they've relied on that don't reflect what actually happened? Or is it that the debt itself might stand, but the penalties feel disproportionate given the circumstances?

Each of those leads to a different strategy. More evidence, a new legal argument, or challenging the penalties separately.

The starting point is always the same. Understand what's wrong with the decision, then build the right strategy around it.

06/08/2026

A defect isn't a case. Causation is.

Aptum associate Tim Wilkinson's latest hot take? Having photos of something not working is a start. But it's not enough for a successful court case.

You need to link a specific person to a specific mistake that caused a specific defect. Which trade, which consultant, what did they do wrong, and did they cause the issue? And ideally, for the economics to make sense, that person needs to have money.

Without that chain from person to mistake to defect to repair, you don't have a building case. You have a photo album.

Agree? Disagree? Tim wants to hear it.

04/08/2026

Four weeks to prepare for a three-week Federal Court trial. Most litigators would say it's not possible.

Aptum associate Christine Turkington was part of the team that made it happen. The pressure forced everyone to focus on what was critical. Divide and conquer. Evidence, submissions, experts, lay witnesses. Each person focused on a different piece.

High intensity, high pressure, but proof of what a focused team can achieve when the priorities are clear and the right people are in the room.

28/07/2026

The ATO says your R&D expenditure wasn't incurred. You know the activity happened. So what's really going on?

In many R&D audits, the ATO's real concern isn't whether the expenditure occurred. It's whether the broader arrangement involved a scheme or a sham. But those cases are harder for the ATO to run and require more evidence on their end to prove.

So they take a simpler path. Based on the evidence in totality, they say the expenditure wasn't incurred.

That distinction is critical for anyone disputing an R&D audit decision. The evidentiary burden of proving expenditure was incurred is very different from having to disprove a sham. Understanding why the ATO assessed you the way they did can open the door to a much simpler dispute and a stronger objection.

Address

L17 525 Collins Street
Melbourne, VIC
3000

Telephone

+61370209230

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Aptum Legal posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Business

Send a message to Aptum Legal:

Shortcuts

Featured

Share

Category