ByLawyers News and Updates

Notice to complete – Conveyancing – NSW

by

The commentary in the By Lawyers Conveyancing NSW Guide and 1001 Conveyancing Answers (NSW) has been updated to highlight some important considerations brought to light in the recent decision on the NSW Court of Appeal in Namrood v Ebadeh-Ahvazi [2017] NSWCA 310, namely the importance of issuing a Notice to Complete before purporting to terminate and the distinction between the completion date and the actual date of completion.

The ‘completion date’ is specified in the contract, but because time is not of the essence and settlements are often delayed, the actual completion date can be a later date. Any provision in a contract providing that something must be done on or by completion is not necessarily a requirement that it be done on or before the completion date

The facts in this case were that the contract of sale provided for work to be done on or by completion. When the completion date passed a notice of termination was served by the purchaser without first serving a notice to complete making the completion date of the essence. The work was subsequently finished and as no essential completion date had been established by a notice to complete, the purported termination by the purchaser failed, was deemed a repudiation of the contract and the deposit paid was forfeited to the vendor. The fact that a time and date for settlement is agreed does not of itself make time of the essence and justify termination.  Either the essentiality of time must be agreed at the outset, or it must be made essential by serving a notice to complete.

This case also highlights the potential issues that arise with inserting special conditions regarding compliance with works notices, which necessarily override s 11 of the Law Society Contract by virtue of the definition of ‘normally’ therein.

The commentaries in the By Lawyers Conveyancing Guides – Acting for the Purchaser and Acting for the Vendor, as well as the relevant sections of 1001 Conveyancing Answers NSW, have been updated accordingly.

 

NSW – Conveyancing – Sale – Replies to requisitions

by

Responding to a recent subscriber request, we have added new standard replies for the following Law Society requisitions:

  • Residential Property 2018;
  • Strata Title (Residential) Property 2018;
  • Commercial 2018; and
  • Strata Title (Commercial) Property 2018.

These replies are in our Conveyancing – Sale (NSW) guide and form part of By Lawyers extensive library of replies to requisitions, which comprises replies to all common forms of requisitions including those produced by the Law Society of NSW and Australian Law Stationers.

Note: when using the By Lawyers Contract for Sale of Land requisitions are not required – by operation of clause 11 of the By Lawyers Contract, the warranties given by the vendor in the contract replace requisitions.

The main function of requisitions in modern conveyancing is to remind the vendor of the implied obligation to deliver a good title. But in the vast majority of matters the vendor’s title is completely uncontroversial. For this reason a practice has developed of including requisitions and answers in the contract. In our view the better approach is to raise only requisitions that need to be raised, rather than standard requisitions that are largely irrelevant and receive a standard response.

In a typical conveyancing matter using the By Lawyers contract there should be no need to raise requisitions except where the purchaser’s enquiries reveal a likely defect in title. The vendor warranties implied into all contracts by the Conveyancing (Sale of Land) Regulation 2017 are included as a reminder to vendors and for the information of purchasers.

Combustible cladding ban – Home building warranties

by

From 15 August 2018, certain combustible cladding, being any cladding with a core comprised of more than 30% polyethylene, is banned in NSW, with limited exceptions. The state-wide prohibition affects any form of the combustible building material used in external cladding, external walls, external insulation, facades or rendered finishes for certain multi-storey residential and commercial premises. The ban is retrospective and applies to buildings built before 15 August 2018.

The use of such cladding is considered a major defect for the purposes of the home building statutory warranties. This means that owners have a period of up to six years in which legal proceedings can be commence against the builder. There is another six months added to the warranty period if the defect only becomes apparent after five and a half years.

The strata defects bond scheme will continue to operate normally. The introduction of the ban does not stop an owners’ corporation from pursuing a claim under the strata defects bond scheme. An owners’ corporation can use all or part of the bond to pay for the rectification of any defective building work that is identified in a final inspection report, including the use of a banned building product.

The Department of Planning and Environment has released a draft Environmental Planning and Assessment Amendment (Identification of Buildings with Combustible Cladding) Regulation 2017 that will require owners of buildings with combustible external wall cladding to register the building with the government and undertake a fire safety assessment within set deadlines.

The By Lawyers Sale and Purchase commentary and our Reference Guide 1001 Conveyancing Answers (NSW) has been updated to reflect these changes.

Queensland – Conveyancing – Changing trustees

by

A new section has been added to the By Lawyers Reference Guide 1001 Conveyancing Answers (QLD) dealing with changing trustees on the title of a property. This applies where the ownership of the property does not change, only the name of the trustee who holds the property for the trust.

The helpful addition covers the procedure required by the Titles Registry to change the name of the trustee on title, with reference to all  necessary forms and supporting documentation and a note regarding stamp duty consequences.

This new section has been added following a question sent to our Mentor service by a practitioner seeking clarification of the procedure in such a case. At By Lawyers we are always looking to enhance our publications to better assist our subscribers with the practical situations they encounter and we hope this is one example of that happening.

Victoria – deregulated Contract of Sale

by

Consequences of the deregulated Contract of Sale of Land

What were the regulations?

The Estate Agents (Contracts) Regulations 2008 (‘regulations’) reached their sunset date on 11 August 2018. Consequently, those regulations and the amending regulations in 2011 and 2014, are revoked. The regulations bound estate agents, but not legal practitioners and conveyancers.

Legal practitioners and conveyancers may prepare contracts of sale of land in any form, and such contracts, provided they satisfy formal requirements, will be enforceable. The regulations on the other hand required estate agents to prepare contracts in the ‘prescribed form’, unless an agent used a form of contract prepared by a legal practitioner or conveyancer.

What does the deregulation mean?

The revocation of the regulations notionally means that the minority of estate agents who chose to prepare contracts are left with no prescribed form of contract. However, s 53A of the Estate Agents Act 1980 authorises agents to use contracts that are approved by a professional association, within the meaning of the then applicable Legal Profession Act 2004. The prescribed contract was approved by the Law Institute of Victoria (LIV) and the revocation of the regulation does not affect that approval. The current version of the LIV contract includes a warranty in GC 2.1 that the general conditions of the contract are identical with the general conditions prescribed in the regulations. That warranty would appear to be unaffected by the revocation of the regulations.  Thus, we can expect that the prescribed contract will continue in general use into the near future.

What are the alternatives to the prescribed contract?

Whether the deregulation of the contract will result in other forms of contract becoming common is yet to be seen. It would be fair to say that special conditions created to accommodate recent changes, including CGT & GST withholding, have resulted in the LIV contract becoming unwieldy and the use of alternative contracts increasing.

The By Lawyers contract is ready and waiting

The By Lawyers Contract of Sale of Land for Victoria was introduced on 1 March 2018 and its use has been increasing steadily among Victorian legal practitioners and conveyancers. The By Lawyers contract covers CGT & GST withholding in simple terms, without the need for Special Conditions, and has a number of other advances over the LIV contract which further simplify the conveyancing process.

Some of the compelling reasons to use the By Lawyers contract include:

  • it is co-authored by Russell Cocks, who has brought to the task 40 years of hands-on Victorian conveyancing experience and Guy Dawson of By Lawyers, arguably the most widely read legal author in Australia today; and,
  • the By Lawyers legal and editorial teams ensure the By Lawyers contract is always up to date with any changes in the law or practice.

For further information you can read the related post Seven reasons to use the By Lawyers contract.

The By Lawyers Contract of sale of Land is available to LEAP users and can also be accessed through the By Lawyers website by subscribing to the Conveyancing Guide.

Leases – New precedent – Deed of amendment – unregistered lease

by

As a result of some helpful feedback from one of our subscribers in Queensland, By Lawyers has added a new precedent ‘Deed of amendment – Unregistered lease’ to all our Act for Lessor matter plans across the country. This deed can be used to record an agreed amendment to an unregistered lease. It includes the following key provisions:

  • Variation details – to be set out in either the operative provisions or in a schedule to the deed;
  • A clause to extend any guarantor covenants in the original lease to the amendments;
  • A clause confirming the terms of the original lease as amended.

At By Lawyers we value feedback from our subscribers and often enhance our publications as a result.

This new Deed is the latest addition to our library of over 6,500 precedents…and counting!

Qld – PEXA settlements – Transfer duty

by

New commentary has been added to the By Lawyers Purchase Guide and 1001 Conveyancing Answers Queensland to clarify the specific stamping requirements for PEXA settlements.

Stamping must commence in the PEXA Workspace so that an ELN Transaction Number generates. This allows OSRconnect to directly verify the transfer duty once stamping has been submitted.

If stamping has already occurred in paper then the ELN Transaction Number does not exist and the system is unable to verify transfer duty so settlement in PEXA is not possible. The transaction will then need to revert to a paper settlement.

See the heading ‘Duties and Grants’ in the By Lawyers Purchase Commentary for details on the procedure to be followed.

Conveyancing – GST withholding – Letter to client

by

GST withholding obligations for purchasers of new residential properties and some vacant land commenced on 1 July 2018.

The commentaries in all By Lawyers Conveyancing Guides – Sale and Purchase, for each state, have previously been amended to deal with the new GST withholding requirements. See the commentaries for details of when the new provisions apply.

Now included in the precedents for both Sale and Purchase is a new ‘Letter to client regarding GST withholding payment’ which explains to clients the new requirements and outlines for them the procedures involved in complying, whether they are a vendor or a purchaser.

This helpful precedent allows you to quickly and correctly advise the client on this important new development in conveyancing procedure, where applicable.

 

Sheriff – Enforcement procedure

by

By Russell Cocks, Solicitor

First published in the Law Institute Journal

The Sheriff for the State of Victoria performs an important function within the Court system, providing an ultimate enforcement procedure for judgments obtain in the Courts.

The Sheriff has been around for a long time. Fans of Robin Hood generally disparage his work but without an ultimate enforcer, Court judgments risk becoming pyrrhic. As an arm of the judicial process, the Sheriff has considerable power to influence the lives of citizens and is liable to review by the Courts. It would be fair to say that the traditional sale process adopted by the Sheriff gave the impression of a preference to the rights of the judgment creditor over the rights of the judgment debtor and appeared to be based on a policy of realising the judgment debtor’s property at all costs, indeed often at great cost to the judgment debtor.

Cases in 2011 and 2012 in the Supreme Court critically analysed the role of the Sheriff and promoted a more proactive role for the Sheriff in analysing the sale process to ensure a fairer outcome for the judgment creditor. This, on at least one occasion, led to the Sheriff’s auction being conducted on-site, rather than at the Sheriff’s Office and an enthusiastic crowd making multiple bids. (see LIJ columns in September 2011 & June 2013) Reform of the sales process had been called for as long ago as 1982, recognising a need for the process to become more transparent by adopting a more commercial focus and perhaps contracting out the auctions to a panel of licenced estate agents.

But Sheriff’s auctions labour under some unique difficulties:

  • the Sheriff has no right to access the property during the sales process to allow for inspection;
  • indeed, the Sheriff has no right to access the property on the day of the auction and cannot guarantee possession to the purchaser after the auction;

Additionally, the Sheriff only sells the interest of the judgment debtor, meaning that the purchaser takes the property subject to any encumbrances, and the Sheriff is not obliged to hand over the duplicate Certificate of Title (or its electronic equivalent). Given that the purchaser must secure registration of the Transfer from the Sheriff before the writ for possession expires, it can be seen that a purchaser from the Sheriff takes a considerable risk and the Sheriff has developed a formula to take account of this risk.

Hoskin v Griffin (The Sheriff) [2018] VSC 216 revealed that the Sheriff’s process involves a 25% discount being applied to the value of the subject property to take account of these difficulties. The problem with that case is that the starting point, the valuation obtained by the Sheriff, was too low to begin with and the application of the 25% discount to this low value meant that the sale was defective.

The judgment debt arose as a result of failure to repay a mortgage of $165,000 in 2015. By the time the judgment debtor had unsuccessfully sought to contest the judgment, costs and interest had more than doubled the debt to $380,000 in 2017. The Sheriff had obtained a valuation from the Valuer-General in 2015 of $450,000 and a fresh valuation in 2017 of $475,000. The Sheriff then calculated the reserve for the auction by applying the 25% discount, to achieve a figure of $340,000, but increased it to $380,000 in view of the judgment debt. The purchaser at the Sheriff’s auction, held in the Sheriff’s Office, made one bid, equal to the reserve and purchased the property. Evidence before the Court established that the true value of the property was at least $700,000. This meant that the purchaser had acquired the judgment debtor’s equity of around $300,000 for free. The Court concluded that the sale process had failed to obtain a fair price and was therefore in breach of the Sheriff’s duty to the judgment debtor. Unravelling the consequences of that finding was left to another day.

There is little doubt that the judgment debtor made some poor decisions during this unhappy episode. A simple debt more than doubled, opportunities to resolve the dispute were ignored and multiple representatives were engaged. The Sheriff faces a difficult task of balancing the rights of the debtor and creditor and it appears that in this case he was dealt a bad hand by the valuation. But if the Sheriff had have accepted the judgment debtor’s valuation of $700,000, the 25% discount would have resulted in a reserve of $525,000 and it is likely that a prospective purchaser, facing all the problems associated with buying from the Sheriff, would have been reluctant to take the risk. This would have resulted in a second Sheriff’s auction without reserve, an evil criticised in the 2011 & 2012 cases.

The call for meaningful reform, now 35 years unanswered, remains.

Tip Box

•Sheriff’s sales are a necessary evil

•Sheriff’s sales involve risks for purchasers

•Reform is overdue

TAS – transfer duty concessions

by

New commentary and forms have been added to the Purchase of real property (TAS) Guide in relation to the availability of new transfer duty concessions for first home owners purchasing an established home and also pensioners downsizing to an established home.

First home transfer duty concessions – Established home

A 50% discount is available on transfer duty for first home buyers of established homes which have a dutiable value of $400,000 or less. The discount is available for purchases of established homes that settle within the period 7 February 2018 and 6 February 2019. The eligibility requirements are set out in full in our commentary. A link to the SRO form Section 46E Concession from duty -Transfer to first home buyers of an established home has been added to the matter plan.

Transfer duty concessions for pensioners downsizing

This concession provides a 50% discount on transfer duty for eligible pensioners who sell their existing home and downsize to another home (not vacant land) with a dutiable value of $400 000 or less (and also less than that of the former home). Both homes must be in Tasmania and the new home must be an established property.

The concession is available where:

  • the sale of the former home settles within the period 10 February 2018 and 9 February 2019; and
  • the purchase of the new home settles within six months before or after the transfer of the former home.

The eligibility requirements are set out in full in our commentary.

A link to the SRO form Sections 46N & 46O Concession from duty -Transfer to pensioner/s downsizing home has been added to the matter plan.

Connect with us