ByLawyers News and Updates

County Court – VIC

by

Common Law Division Practice Note PNCLD 1-2025 takes effect in the County Court from 25 March 2025 and replaces 21 existing practice notes.

The new practice note, which stretches to 159 pages and includes a dictionary setting out key definitions, covers all the practices and case management expectations for all proceedings in the Common Law Division, including for the various specialist lists, and Appeals.

The new Common Law Division practice note supersedes the following practice notes:

  • PNCLD 1-2023 Common Law Division practice note
  • PNCLD 2-2023 Serious injury applications practice note
  • PNCLD 3-2022 WorkCover List practice note
  • PNCLD 4-2023 Family Property List practice note
  • PNCLD 5-2023 Medical List practice note
  • PNCLD 6-2023 Confiscation List practice note
  • PNCLD 7-2023 Defamation List practice note
  • PNCLD 8-2023 Adoptions, Surrogacy and Name Change List practice note
  • PNCLD 12-2023 Applications for approval of compromise practice note
  • PNCLD 13-2022 Applications by a solicitor for costs in work injury damages claims practice note
  • PNCLD 14-2023 Applications to file a notice of ceasing to act practice note
  • PNCLD 15-2023 Applications to take evidence by deposition practice note
  • PNCLD 16-2023 Information Technology (IT) practice note
  • PNCLD 17-2023 Judicial mediation practice note
  • PNCLD 18-2023 Subpoenas practice note
  • PNCLD 19-2023 Institutional Liability List practice note
  • PNCLD SP-2-2022 Suppression, pseudonym (and like) order applications practice note
  • PNCLD SA 2-2022 Applications for compensation under s85B of the Sentencing Act 1991 practice note
  • PNCLD SO 2-2022 Applications for supervision orders under the Serious Offenders Act 2018 practice note
  • PNCLD FV 2-2024 Family Violence and Personal Safety Intervention Order appeals practice note
  • PNCI 9-2021 eCase: electronic subpoenas practice note.

The specialist lists dealt with by the practice note are:

  • The Civil Claims lists: Serious Injury List; WorkCover List; Medical List; Institutional Liability List; Defamation List; Family Property List; and the General List.
  • Adoptions, Surrogacy and Name Changes List.
  • Confiscation List.
  • Appeals and Post Sentence Application List.

Links in the commentary for both Acting for the Plaintiff and Acting for the Defendant in the in By Lawyers County Court (VIC) publication have been updated accordingly.

Sexual harassment – QLD

by

From 1 March 2025, all businesses with operations in Queensland are required to have a written prevention plan to manage the risks associated with sexual harassment and sex or gendered-based harassment. The requirement arises under the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (Qld) and the Work Health and Safety Regulation 2011 (Qld).

Any business without such a plan in place or that has not taken reasonable steps to make workers aware of the plan, is in breach of the Regulation and subject to fines of up to $6,000 per offence.

By Lawyers 101 Staff Handbook, part of the popular Practice Management publication, includes a national Discrimination, harassment and bullying policy that is an excellent starting place for QLD firms needing to comply with the legislative requirements.

More detailed state-specific resources are available on the WorkSafe QLD website, including a prevention plan template.

The commentary in the By Lawyers Practice Management publication will assist Queensland practitioners in formulating their management plan and reducing their risk. It includes a detailed discussion about sexual harassment with specific areas of focus for the legal profession and links to relevant cases involving law firms. There is also an outline of the factors that should be considered when implementing firm policies to ensure that they have the desired effect and prevent discriminatory and other unwelcome workplace practices.

Generative AI – NSW

by

Practice Note SC GEN 23 Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence and the associated Judicial Guidelines concerning the use of generative AI in documents that are put before the court apply to all matters in the Supreme Court from 3 February 2025.

The same provisions apply from the same date in the District Court by virtue of a new District Court General Practice Note 2 Generative AI Practice Note and Judicial Guidelines, which adopts the Supreme Court’s practice note and guidelines.

The key provisions of the practice note are:

  • Legal practitioners should be aware of the limits, risks, and shortcomings of any particular generative AI program they use, including the scope for hallucinations.
  • It is impermissible, without the leave of the court, to enter into any generative AI program information to which the implied undertaking, also called the Harman undertaking, applies, such as another party’s affidavits or material produced under subpoena, unless the legal practitioner or person with responsibility for the file is satisfied that the information will remain confidential, will only be used in connection with the proceedings, and will not be used to train the AI program.
  • AI must not be used in generating the content of affidavits, witness statements, character references, or other material intended to reflect a deponent or witness’ evidence or opinion, or any other material tendered in evidence or used in cross-examination.
  • If generative AI has been used in the preparation of written submissions, summaries, or arguments the author must verify in the document that all citations, legal and academic authority, and case law and legislative references exist, are accurate, and are relevant to the proceedings.
  • Affidavits, witness statements, and character references must contain a statement that AI was not used in generating their content.
  • Generative AI must not be used to draft or prepare the content of an expert report, without the prior leave of the court, and parties must bring that requirement to the expert’s attention.
  • There is a procedure for parties to seek leave if an expert proposes to use generative AI for their report, and also imposes disclosure and record-keeping obligations on the expert if leave is granted and AI is used for the report.

The Judicial Guidelines apply to all courts in New South Wales.

The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules have also been amended from 3 February 2025 to reflect these changes.

The following rules have been amended:

  • Rule 31.4: Court may direct party to furnish witness statement
  • Rule 31.27: Experts’ reports
  • Rule 51.12: Party to file and serve White Folder with summons seeking leave
  • Rule 51.13: Opposing party to file a response
  • Rule 51.36: Content of written submissions
  • Rule 51.45: Proceedings in supervisory jurisdiction
  • Rule 59.8: Procedure—Court Book, defendant’s argument and plaintiff’s argument in reply
  • Schedule 7: Expert witness code of conduct

The following new rules have been created:

  • Rule 35.3B: Use of generative artificial intelligence in affidavits
  • Dictionary: Definition of generative artificial intelligence

These amendments to the rules regulate the use of generative AI for:

  • affidavits, witness statements and other evidentiary material;
  • written submissions and summaries of argument; and
  • experts’ reports.

The commentary and precedents in By Lawyers Supreme Court (NSW) and District Court (NSW) guides have been updated in line with these new rules and practice directions. This includes links to the practice notes, and precedents such as letters instructing expert witnesses and clauses for affidavits.

The commentary in By Lawyers Local Court Civil (NSW) guide has been updated in line with the new rules.

Relevant precedents have also been added to the NSW Injuries publications: Personal Injury, Motor Vehicle Accidents, Workers Compensation, and Family Provision Claims.

The Implied undertaking section in By Lawyers 101 Subpoena Answers, available in the Reference Materials folder on all litigation matter plans, has also been updated.

New UCPR Forms 40 and 163 that contain the required disclosure notice that generative AI was not used are also being added to the relevant matter plans.

Succession – SA

by

New court rules and practice notes are in effect to reflect the Succession Act 2023 (SA) which extensively reframed South Australian succession law when it commenced on 1 January 2025.

Succession Act

The Succession Act consolidated and amended various legislation relating to:

  • wills;
  • probate and administration;
  • administration of deceased estates;
  • intestacy; and
  • family provision claims.

The Succession Act now contains all legislative provisions relating to those areas, having repealed the following existing Acts:

  • Administration and Probate Act 1919 (SA);
  • Inheritance (Family Provision) Act 1972 (SA);
  • Wills Act 1936 (SA).

Succession rules and practice note changes

New and revised court rules for probate, administration, contested wills, and family provision matters have been released to reflect the new legislation.

The rules are contained in the new Chapter 25 – Probate – Supreme Court of the Uniform Civil Rules 2020.

The Supreme Court’s practice notes reflecting the new Act and rules are:

Key changes made by the revised court rules and practice notes include:

  • making the electronic filing of all probate applications and documents mandatory;
  • setting out detailed requirements for scanning and submitting documents;
  • proceedings under Chapter 25 are to be commenced by way of originating application except for:
    • applications for grants of probate or letters of administration;
    • amendments of grants;
    • revocation of grants;
  • required wording in an administrator’s oath when clearing off all persons having a prior entitlement to the grant and for the description of the administrator;
  • required description of assets and liabilities of an estate;
  • required wording to describe the caveator and the person warning the caveat; and
  • 50 new probate forms.

Legislative changes

The key changes under the new legislation include:

  • the right of certain classes of person to inspect a will of a deceased person;
  • the power of the Supreme Court to pass over applicants for a grant of probate or administration and appoint another person it considers appropriate;
  • the removal of the need for a grant to administer smaller estates;
  • additional court powers to hold executors and administrators to account;
  • codification of the application of assets to payment of debts and liabilities in solvent estates;
  • the increase to the preferential legacy for a surviving spouse of an intestate;
  • the addition of the children of first cousins of an intestate to the distribution on intestacy;
  • no entitlement of a spouse or domestic partner of an intestate to any part of an intestate’s estate if they are a party to:
    • a binding financial agreement; or
    • orders for distribution of property under the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth);
  • primary consideration of the deceased’s wishes by the court when determining whether to make a family provision order; and
  • narrowing eligibility for family provision claims to:
    • exclude former partners and spouses when financial matters have already been settled;
    • require adult stepchildren to demonstrate they:
      • are disabled and vulnerable;
      • were genuinely dependent on the deceased;
      • cared for or maintained the deceased; or
      • contributed to the estate, or their parent substantially contributed to the estate;
    • require grandchildren to satisfy the court that:
      • their parents died before the deceased; or
      • they were wholly or partly maintained by the deceased.

Publication updates

The following By Lawyers publications have been updated for all these legislative, rules, and practice direction changes, with the new forms added to the matter plans as required:

Cash reporting – FED

by

Solicitors no longer have cash reporting obligations under the Financial Transaction Reports Act 1988 (FTR Act). However, changes that commence on 31 March 2026 will place significant new obligations on law firms for initial and ongoing AML/CTF due diligence.

The FTR Act was entirely repealed with effect from 7 January 2025 by Schedule 11 of the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing (Amendment) Act 2024 (the Amending Act).

The Amending Act substantially amends the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act 2006 (AML/CTF Act) to place new obligations on lawyers who perform certain work as reporting entities. However, the relevant amendments to the AML/CTF Act do not commence until 31 March 2026.

From 7 January 2025 solicitors are no longer regulated under the FTR Act, and do not need to report significant cash transactions of $10,000 or more, or the equivalent in foreign currency, to AUSTRAC. See AUSTRAC’s webpage Repeal of the Financial Transaction Reports Act 1988 for more information.

In the interim, solicitors still have professional obligations that can in some circumstances require cash reporting. See the The Law Council of Australia’s National Legal Profession Anti-Money Laundering & Counter-Terrorism Financing Guidance Note 2 for more information.

The By Lawyers Practice Management publication has been updated in line with the repeal of the FTR Act.

The changes that commence on 31 March 2026 will be significant for most law firms, with new due diligence and reporting obligations. By Lawyers will be updating our publications with information and guidance about these requirements when they commence.

Professional bodies for lawyers and conveyancers around the country already have substantial information available about these changes on their websites. Practitioners can expect professional legal education providers to focus on the topic in the coming 12 months, and legal software providers such as LEAP to provide efficient application-based solutions.

County Court costs – VIC

by

New rules provide for County Court costs to be taxed in the Costs Court under the Supreme Court Scale of Costs that operates by reference to hourly rates from 1 January 2025.

Costs in the County Court are dealt with under Order 63 of the County Court Civil Procedure Rules 2018, which now adopts the Scale of Costs in Schedule 1 of Appendix A to the Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2015.

In most cases, the parties will agree on the amount of costs to be paid. If they do not agree, the dispute is referred to the Costs Court.

The scale is based principally on time costing. If a client has been charged on the basis of hourly rates for work done, Section 1 of the Scale applies and provides that the costs payable to the entitled party are to be allowed on the basis of reasonable hourly rates, up to the maximum hourly rate set out in the scale. There are 3 tiers of maximum rates according to a practitioner’s years of post-admission experience. There are no minimum rates.

Section 1 also sets out maximum hourly rates for work done by employees of a law practice who are not legal practitioners. The maximum rates for those employees depend on whether their work required legal skill or knowledge.

All claims must be reasonable. In setting rates to be charged to clients, and in making costs claims, practitioners must observe their overarching obligation to ensure that costs are reasonable and proportionate under s 24 of the Civil Procedure Act 2010.

The time-based model does not mean that a law practice must charge their clients on an hourly basis. The scale also provides for assessment of costs where the entitled party has not been charged on the basis of hourly rates. In such a case, the Costs Court will allow a reasonable amount for the work.

See the By Lawyers County Court (VIC) and Supreme Court (VIC) publications for more information.

Succession Act – SA

by

The Succession Act 2023 (SA) extensively reframes South Australian succession law.

The Act commences on 1 January 2025.

It consolidates and amends existing laws relating to:

  • wills;
  • probate and administration;
  • administration of deceased estates;
  • intestacy; and
  • family provision claims.

The Succession Act contains all legislative provisions, including new provisions, relating to those areas. The new Act repeals three existing Acts:

Revised court rules and practice directions for probate, administration, contested wills, and family provision matters will follow the commencement of the new Act.

Key provisions of the new legislation include:

  • the right of certain classes of person to inspect a will of a deceased person;
  • the power of the Supreme Court to pass over applicants for a grant of probate or administration and appoint another person it considers appropriate;
  • the removal of the need for a grant to administer smaller estates;
  • additional court powers to hold executors and administrators to account;
  • codification of the application of assets to payment of debts and liabilities in solvent estates;
  • the increase to the preferential legacy for a surviving spouse of an intestate;
  • the addition of the children of first cousins of an intestate to the distribution on intestacy;
  • no entitlement of a spouse or domestic partner of an intestate to any part of an intestate’s estate if they are a party to:
    • a binding financial agreement; or
    • orders for distribution of property under the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth);
  • primary consideration of the deceased’s wishes by the court when determining whether to make a family provision order;
  • narrowing eligibility for family provision claims to:
    • exclude former partners and spouses when financial matters have already been settled;
    • require adult stepchildren to demonstrate they:
      • are disabled and vulnerable;
      • were genuinely dependent on the deceased;
      • cared for or maintained the deceased; or
      • contributed to the estate, or their parent substantially contributed to the estate;
    • require grandchildren to satisfy the court that:
      • their parents died before the deceased; or
      • they were wholly or partly maintained by the deceased.

The By Lawyers Wills (SA), Probate (SA), Letters of Administration (SA), and Family Provision Claims (SA) publications have been updated accordingly. Further updates will follow when the new court rules are available.

Family violence visas – FED

by

New eligibility criteria for visas under family violence provisions of the Migration Act commenced on 17 December 2024.

The provisions are intended to prevent secondary visa applicants from feeling compelled to remain in a violent relationship with the primary applicant for fear of an adverse visa outcome.

Violent behaviour can include physical abuse, sexual abuse, verbal or emotional abuse, social abuse, and financial abuse.

Eligibility for family violence visas

A secondary applicant must satisfy the primary criteria of being a member of a family unit at the time of being granted a visa.

A member of a family unit is a spouse or de facto partner, or a child or step-child of the primary visa applicant. A person over the age of 18 is deemed to be a child if they have not turned 23, and are dependent on the family head or the spouse or de facto partner of the family head. If they are over 23, they are still a member of the family unit if they are dependent due to a disability. A dependent grandchild or step-grandchild of the primary applicant is also a member of a family unit. 

Without the family violence provisions, a secondary visa applicant whose relationship with the primary visa applicant has broken down would no longer be a member of a family unit and would not satisfy the primary criteria to be granted a visa.

However, a secondary visa applicant who ceases to be a member of a family unit as a result of family violence perpetrated against them by the primary visa applicant can still apply for a visa under the family violence provisions. 

See the Types of domestic and family violence page of the Department of Home Affairs for further details. 

Evidence

A secondary visa applicant who claims family violence must provide evidence to the Department of Home Affairs about the primary applicant’s violent conduct towards them, and their prior relationship status. Evidence of family violence can include medical reports, police statements, court orders, convictions and a statutory declaration for a family violence claim.  See the Family violence provisions – Secondary applicants page of the Department of Home Affairs for further information. 

The family violence provisions have been expanded to include several new visa subclasses previously not covered:

  • Parent (Subclass 103);
  • Remaining Relative (Subclass 115);
  • Carer (Subclass 116);
  • Business Talent (Subclass 132);
  • Contributory Parent (Subclass 143);
  • Pacific Engagement (Subclass 192);
  • Aged Parent (Subclass 804);
  • Remaining Relative (Subclass 835);
  • Carer (Subclass 836);
  • Contributory Aged Parent (Subclass 864); and
  • Business Innovation and Investment (Subclass 888).

Publication updates

The By Lawyers Immigration publication has been updated to include the new visa types. 

Bail and sentencing – WA

by

Bail and sentencing options have changed with commencement of the final tranche of amendments under the Family Violence Legislation Reform Act 2024.

From 18 December 2024 Bail authorities can impose electronic monitoring as part of bail and sentencing conditions for certain family violence offenders. In some cases,  an electronic monitoring condition must be applied.

Bail

Schedule 1 of the Bail Act 1982 creates a rebuttable presumption against bail being granted for certain offences. For offences in these categories, the presumption can be rebutted if there are exceptional reasons why the accused should not be kept in custody and the bail authority is satisfied that bail may properly be granted.

The amendments create new circumstances where the presumption applies, namely to family violence offences as defined in clause 3F(1A) and offenders who have been declared a serial family violence offender as defined in s 3 of the Act. In these cases, bail can only be granted by a judicial officer and must include an electronic monitoring condition.

Clause 3G creates a rebuttable presumption against bail for a person charged with a family violence offence (category A) as defined in the clause who is bound by a family violence restraining order that protects a victim of the current offence. In these cases, bail can only be granted by a judicial officer and must include an electronic monitoring condition. See Schedule 1 Part D and Part E.

Sentencing

When the court is sentencing:

  • for a family violence offence and the offender has been declared a serial family violence offender, if making a CSI the court must impose an electronic monitoring requirement unless satisfied that there are exceptional circumstances;
  • an offender who has been declared a serial family violence offender, if making a PSO the court must consider and may impose an electronic monitoring requirement for the term of the PSO, and must do so if the offence is a family violence offence;
  • an offender for a family violence offence or who has been declared a serial family violence offender, if when making a CBO or an ISO the court must impose an electronic monitoring requirement unless satisfied that there are exceptional circumstances.

Publication updates

The By Lawyers Magistrates Court – Criminal (WA) guide has been updated accordingly. See Bail and Sentencing.

For information on legislative amendments and publication updates arising from the previously commenced parts of the amending Act, see the By Lawyers Restraining Order (WA) guide, and our previous News & Updates post

Costs Court – VIC

by

Changes to the way costs are calculated in the Costs Court have effect from 1 January 2025 following amendments to Order 63 of the Supreme Court Rules, and the Appendix that deals with costs.

The new scale of costs is based principally on time costing, whereas the previous scale was based principally on items of legal work or particular services.

If a client has been charged on the basis of hourly rates for work done, Section 1 of the scale applies and provides that the costs payable to the entitled party are to be allowed on the basis of reasonable hourly rates, up to the maximum hourly rate set out in the scale. There are three tiers of maximum rates according to a practitioner’s years of post-admission experience. There are no minimum rates.

The scale also sets out maximum hourly rates for work done by employees of a law practice who are not legal practitioners. The maximum rates for those employees depend on whether their work required legal skill or knowledge.

The maximum hourly rates are not an endorsement by the Court that those rates are reasonable in every case, or even in most cases, nor an invitation for practitioners to charge clients the maximum hourly rate and then claim that rate as between the parties.

All claims in the Costs Court must be reasonable. In setting rates to be charged to clients, and in making costs claims, practitioners must bear in mind their overarching obligation to ensure that costs are reasonable and proportionate: s 24 of the Civil Procedure Act 2010.

In assessing costs, the Costs Court will determine whether the amount claimed relative to the work performed is reasonable on an item-by-item basis. This means that the same hourly rate will not necessarily be allowed for all time spent or work done by the same individual.  The hourly rate allowed for a lawyer drafting a letter requiring legal skill may be higher than the rate for the same lawyer collating court books.

An application can be made for the Court to allow an increase to the maximum rates if there are special grounds arising out of the nature and importance, difficulty, or urgency of the case. If the matter runs to trial, then the trial judge will usually be best placed to determine such an application.

The time-based model does not mean that a law practice must charge their clients on an hourly basis. The scale provides for the assessment of costs where the entitled party has not been charged on the basis of hourly rates. In such a case, the Costs Court will allow a reasonable amount for the work.

The scale sets out what the court can consider in determining reasonableness for both time-based costing and alternative costing. These include the actual hourly rates charged to the client, the complexity of the matter, the time required, and the difficulty or novelty of the questions involved.

The By Lawyers Supreme Court – Acting for the Plaintiff (VIC) and Supreme Court – Acting for the Defendant publications have been updated accordingly.

Connect with us