obiter | ByLawyers News and Updates

Letter to strata manager – NSW

By

The By Lawyers conveyancing precedent Letter to strata manager requesting Section 184 certificate has been amended to include a settlement date and contact details for the purchaser’s representative.

It is the experience of practitioners that with electronic settlements, sending the section 22 notice to strata managers can often be overlooked. For this reason, the letter requesting the s 184 certificate now includes a settlement date, contact details for the purchaser’s representative and a reminder that if there is a problem after settlement the strata manager should contact the purchaser’s representative in the first instance.

This improvement was the result of user feedback. At By Lawyers, we pride ourselves on the cooperative and collegiate relationship we have with the firms using our commentary and precedents daily. We value the feedback that we receive as it helps us to continually improve our publications.

This enhanced precedent letter is available on the matter plan in the Conveyancing – Sale of real property Guide (NSW).

Retail shop lease disclosure – QLD

By

The By Lawyers To do list precedent has been updated in the By Lawyers Leases (QLD) Guide to include a section on retail shop lease disclosure requirements of both the lessor and lessee.

New leases

At least seven days before a retail shop lease is entered into, a lessee must have been given a disclosure statement and a copy of the lease by the lessor.

If the disclosure statement is not given, is incomplete, or contains information that is materially false or misleading, the lessee may terminate the lease by notice in writing at any time within six months.

The lessor’s disclosure statement includes a lessee’s disclosure statement, allowing the lessee to set out representations made to the lessee. The Act requires the lessee to complete and give to the lessor this statement at least seven days before entering into the lease.

Sublease

Where a sublessor has requested a head lessor disclosure statement, the lessor must provide it within 28 days.

Renewal

On renewal of a retail lease the lessor must provide a copy of a current disclosure statement to the lessee within 7 days of receiving a renewal notice.

Precedent update

The new section of the To Do list covers the time limits for retail lease disclosure in relation to:

  • new leases;
  • sublease; and
  • renewal of existing leases.

Thanks

This enhancement was the result of user feedback. At By Lawyers, we pride ourselves on the cooperative and collegiate relationship we have with the firms using our commentary and precedents daily. We value the feedback that we receive as it helps us to continually improve our publications.

Retail premises lease disclosure – VIC

By

The By Lawyers To do list precedent has been updated in the By Lawyers Leases (VIC) Guide to include a section on retail premises lease disclosure requirements.

New retail premises leases

At least seven days before a retail premises lease is entered into, a lessee must have been given a disclosure statement and copy of the proposed lease by the lessor. The maximum penalty for failing to comply is 50 penalty units.

Renewal of retail premises leases

On renewal of a retail lease the lessor must provide a disclosure statement to the tenant at least 21 days before the end of the current term of the lease where option to renew applies, or no later than 14 days after the entering into an agreement to renew.

Assignment of retail premises leases

If a lessee assigns a retail shop lease it is relieved from liability to pay money under the lease if it serves upon both the lessor and the assignee a copy of a disclosure statement.

Precedent update

The new section of the To Do list covers the time limits for retail lease disclosure in relation to:

  • new leases;
  • assignment; and
  • renewal of existing leases.

Thanks

This enhancement was the result of user feedback. At By Lawyers, we pride ourselves on the cooperative and collegiate relationship we have with the firms using our commentary and precedents daily. We value the feedback that we receive as it helps us to continually improve our publications.

Contract of sale of land – VIC

By

The Law Institute of Victoria has recently released a new version of their contract of sale of land. The By Lawyers Conveyancing Guide has been updated to include references to the current clauses of the 2019 LIV contract.

While no form of contract is prescribed by law any longer, various requirements are prescribed before a contract can be enforced.

The 2019 By Lawyers Contract of Sale of Land also meets these requirements and has a number of advantages over the LIV contract. The sale and purchase commentaries in the By Lawyers Conveyancing Guide include a detailed comparison between the LIV contract and the By Lawyers contract on a clause-by-clause basis, to assist in comparing them.

The By Lawyers Contract of Sale of Land, co-authored by conveyancing guru and By Lawyers author Russell Cocks, provides a vendor’s statement and contract in one document. The By Lawyers  contract is specifically designed for residential conveyancing transactions and seeks to overcome some of the traditional road blocks that arise.

The By Lawyers 2019 Contract of Sale of Land is located in the Contract folder in the Sale of Real Property Guide and is also available to purchase through InfoTrack.

For further information, see the article Seven reasons to use the By Lawyers contract or listen to an informative podcast explaining the features of the By Lawyers contract.

Retail lease disclosure – NSW

By

The By Lawyers To do list precedent has been updated in the By Lawyers Leases (NSW) Guide to include a section on retail lease disclosure requirements of both the lessor and lessee.

New leases

At least seven days before a retail shop lease is entered into, a lessee must have been given a disclosure statement by the lessor. The maximum penalty for failing to comply is 50 penalty units.

If the disclosure statement is not given, is incomplete, or contains information that is materially false or misleading, the lessee may terminate the lease by notice in writing at any time within six months.

The lessor’s disclosure statement includes a lessee’s disclosure statement, allowing the lessee to set out representations made to the lessee. The Act requires the lessee to complete and give to the lessor this statement within seven days of receipt of the lessor’s disclosure statement. There is a penalty of 50 penalty units if this is not done, but there is no right for the lessor to rescind the lease.

Renewal

On renewal of a retail lease the lessor may provide an update together with a copy of the earlier disclosure statement, or a fresh one.

Assignment

If a lessee assigns a retail shop lease it is relieved from liability to pay money under the lease if it serves upon both the lessor and the assignee a copy of an assignor’s disclosure. This must be done at least seven days before the assignment.

Precedent update

The new section of the To Do list covers the time limits for retail lease disclosure in relation to:

  • new leases;
  • assignment; and
  • renewal of existing leases.

Thanks

This enhancement was the result of user feedback. At By Lawyers, we pride ourselves on the cooperative and collegiate relationship we have with the firms using our commentary and precedents daily. We value the feedback that we receive as it helps us to continually improve our publications.

Testamentary capacity

By

Testamentary capacity was considered in a recent Victorian Supreme Court case.

The court found In the Matter of the Will and Estate of Joyce Helen Greer, deceased [2019] VSC 592 that the then 95-year-old testator had capacity. Her will in which she made no provision for one of her two adult sons was admitted to probate.

Of importance in the court’s decision was evidence from the lawyer who took the instructions and drew the will. This was not the testator’s usual solicitor. Her long-term solicitor, one of the executors of the will, had referred the testator to another solicitor, a specialist in wills. He had taken comprehensive instructions and made appropriate notes. He also sought a medical report from the testator’s usual doctor.

The evidence of the testator’s doctor impressed the court and it was preferred to evidence from expert medical practitioners led by both parties. The experts gave opinions based on records, but had not seen the testator.

One of the experts noted a ‘…general consensus amongst experts that capacity is task specific and that individuals with cognitive impairment may retain capacity to do many tasks. Even if [the testator] had been suffering from a degree of executive impairment affecting, for example, her ability to regulate her behavior in a social setting, it did not necessarily follow that she lacked testamentary capacity‘. That is an important point for solicitors taking instructions from will makers to bear in mind.

The case includes, at [126] – [133], an analysis of the cases on proof of testamentary capacity. The court noted that ‘The proof required to establish testamentary capacity does not need to eliminate all doubt and a residual ‘doubt’ does not necessarily exclude the existence of testamentary capacity‘.

The statement of Kirby P in Re Griffith (1995) 217 ALR 284, 294 that the freedom of testation includes the freedom to be ‘unfair, unwise or harsh with one’s own property’ was also cited with approval.

This useful case on testamentary capacity has been added to the By Lawyers 101 Succession Answers (NSW) publication. This valuable resource is found in the Reference Materials folder in the Wills, Estates, Family Provision Claims, and Powers of Attorney, Appointment of Enduring Guardian and Advance Care Planning guides.

Mine subsidence certificates – NSW

By

Mine subsidence certificates have been abolished in NSW.

From 30 September 2019, certificates of compliance for properties under Section 15 of the former Mine Subsidence Compensation Act 1961 are no longer available from Subsidence Advisory NSW.

Subsidence Advisory NSW’s records indicate the vast majority of developments in mine subsidence districts are approved structures. In the last ten years, only four claims for homes have been refused due to the structure being non-compliant. Due to the extremely low likelihood of a claim being made for a non-compliant property, the significant cost increase to adequately undertake compliance checks prior to issuing certificates was deemed unwarranted.

As a result, the certificates were not carried over to the Coal Mine Subsidence Compensation Act 2017. Property owners are afforded the following alternative protections under the Act:

  • Subsidence Advisory NSW has discretion to pay a claim for subsidence damage to a contravening development in circumstances where the failure to obtain the relevant approvals was not the fault of the property owner or where exceptional circumstances exist.
  • Under Section 23(a) of the Act, buyers have the right to withdraw from a contract of sale for a structure that does not comply with Subsidence Advisory NSW’s development requirements.

Prospective purchasers who wish to ascertain whether a structure is eligible for compensation can do so by obtaining confirmation of development approval through the vendor or council.

Precedent update – Conveyancing – VIC

By

A precedent update has followed recent user feedback. Significant amendments have been made to the ‘Letter to purchaser after exchange‘ in the Purchase of Real Property Guide.

This useful precedent letter now includes headings and reflects the process of payment of transfer duty where settlement is to occur electronically.

The areas covered, now organised under the new headings, are as follows:

  • GST
  • Investigation of title
  • Transfer duty
  • Insurance
  • Pre-settlement

The ‘Letter to purchaser after exchange when no initial letter done’ has also been amended to reflect these changes.

At By Lawyers we love to receive feedback from our users and they are often the reason that we conduct a precedent update.

Precedent update – Conveyancing – NSW

By

A precedent update has followed recent user feedback. Significant amendments have been made to the ‘Letter to purchaser after exchange’ in the Purchase of Real Property Guide.

This useful precedent letter now includes headings and reflects the process of payment of transfer duty where settlement is to occur electronically.

The areas covered, now organised under the new headings are as follows:

  • GST
  • Investigation of title
  • Transfer duty
  • Insurance
  • Pre-settlement

The ‘Letter to purchaser after exchange when no initial letter done’ has also been amended to reflect these changes.

At By Lawyers we love to receive feedback from our users and they are often the reason that we conduct a precedent update.

Legal professional privilege – FED

By

Legal professional privilege can be a complex area. But it can also be a very important area for practitioners and their clients. Fast, accurate answers to difficult questions about legal professional privilege can be extremely valuable. By Lawyers provides substantial commentary, cases and legislation on legal professional privilege in both Practice Management and 101 Subpoena Answers publications.

Evidence Act or common law?

A critical consideration when dealing with legal professional privilege is whether the uniform evidence law or the common law applies. Generally, in state courts the applicable state Evidence Act applies in all situations. However in federal jurisdictions, the Commonwealth Evidence Act applies at trial, but the common law applies in interlocutory proceedings.

The recent case of Dr Michael Van Thanh Quach v MLC Life Limited (No 2) [2019] FCA 1322 dealt with legal professional privilege in a federal jurisdiction. The matter involved an objection taken to the production of documents under subpoena. The objection was on the basis of legal professional privilege, and specifically litigation privilege.

Being an interlocutory application Griffiths J applied (at [12]) the common law test where ‘litigation privilege attaches to confidential communications between a legal advisor or client and a third party if made for the dominant purpose of use in, or in relation to, litigation which is then on foot or is reasonably anticipated’.

Evidence

The court held that whomever claims privilege bears the onus of establishing the basis for the claim. That party is required to adduce admissible direct evidence to demonstrate that the claim is properly made. This means revealing the relevant characteristics of each document that will allow the court to uphold a claim for privilege. Simply tendering the relevant document and asking the court to test for privilege will not be sufficient. This affirms Brereton J’s decision in Hancock v Rinehart (Privilege) [2016] NSWSC 12 that the court’s power to inspect a document is not to facilitate the requisite proof, but to scrutinise and test the claim.

This is an important point for practitioners instructed to make such a claim. Detailed evidence must be filed as to the reason for and circumstances of the creation of the documents, including how confidentiality was maintained. The deponent of the affidavit may be cross-examined. For this reason the solicitor with carriage of the matter should think very hard before being the one to swear such an affidavit.

‘Reasonably anticipated’

Griffiths J also affirmed that, for the privilege to apply, the litigation must be reasonably anticipated, not simply a mere possibility. This does not mean more likely than not. It is to be determined objectively.

More information

See the By Lawyers Practice Management guide, or the 101 Subpoena Answers publication in the Reference materials folder of every By Lawyers litigation guide, for more detail about this case and more information on legal professional privilege generally.

Connect with us