ByLawyers News and Updates

Temporary changes to insolvency laws – FED

by

The Federal Government has made temporary changes to insolvency laws under the Coronavirus Economic Response Package Omnibus Act 2020, aimed at relieving current economic pressures on individuals and companies.

The Act commenced on 25 March 2020.

These temporary changes to insolvency laws are as follows:

Bankruptcy

The time for a debtor to comply with a bankruptcy notice has been extended from 21 days to six months. The threshold for initiating bankruptcy proceedings increases from $5,000 to $20,000. These changes will apply for six months from commencement of the Act.

The same six month time extension applies to the time within which a debtor is protected from enforcement action by a creditor, following their presentation of a declaration of intention to present a debtor’s petition, under s 54A Bankruptcy Act.

Liquidation

The time for a debtor company to comply with a statutory demand has been extended from 21 days to six months. The threshold to issue a statutory demand has been increased from $2,000 to $20,000. These changes will apply until 25 September 2020.

Safe harbour

A new, temporary, s 588GAAA ‘Safe harbour—temporary relief in response to the coronavirus’, of the Corporations Act 2001 provides that the existing civil penalties for directors failing to prevent insolvent trading under ss 588G(2) do not apply in relation to a debt incurred by a company if the debt is incurred in the ordinary course of the company’s business and until 25 September 2020.

Practitioners should keep these changes in mind for the next six months and be aware of the end date, which is 25 September 2020.

Alerts have been added to the By Lawyers Insolvency – Bankruptcy of Individuals, Insolvency – Company Liquidation and Companies commentaries notifying subscribers of these changes.

 

Keep up-to-date with our latest COVID-19 News & Updates

Assisting clients to manage their affairs – All states

by

Assisting clients to manage their affairs

With the threat and uncertainty surrounding the Coronavirus many practitioners will be asked to prepare documents assisting clients to manage their affairs should the need arise.

By Lawyers commentary and precedents for Wills, Powers of Attorney, Guardianship and Directives across every state of Australia are available to help practitioners to respond to these requests.

In brief:

  • A will provides for the administration and distribution of a person’s property in the event of their death.
  • A power of attorney enables a person to empower someone they trust to conduct their legal and financial affairs on request. However, this power ceases should the principal lose capacity to authorise its use. This power can be witnessed by any adult.
  • An enduring power of attorney enables a person to empower someone they trust to conduct their legal and financial affairs without specific authorisation should the principal become unable to conduct their own affairs. Note: This power requires specific witnessing.
  • An enduring guardian or a medical power or an advance care directive. These powers are similar to an enduring power of attorney in that they allow a person to choose someone they trust to manage their health and lifestyle decisions, but not their financial affairs, should they become unable to do so themselves.

Helpful resources

The By Lawyers Wills publications provide detailed retainer instructions which can also be signed as an informal will in emergency situations should the need arise. Otherwise a will should be witnessed by two uninterested parties over the age of 18. The By Lawyers publication provides signing clauses for wills by handicapped, blind, non-English speaking and illiterate testators.

Detailed signing instructions are available and can be emailed to the client with the will should personal attendance at the office be difficult or undesirable.

The guides contain a full suite of wills for single people, people with a partner and for people with blended families. There are testamentary trust wills as well as international wills.

Practitioners will also find a full suite of the other important estate planning documents, for both financial and health & lifestyle matters.

There are practical and detailed commentaries to assist the practitioner to quickly and efficiently advise their clients on any issue of concern to them.  The retainer instructions and ‘to do’ lists ensure thorough and complete attention to all relevant considerations.

For further information

Please don’t hesitate to contact us at askus@bylawyers.com.au

Family provision claims – Acting for the Plaintiff (NSW)

by

A full review of the By Lawyers Family provision claims – Acting for the plaintiff guide has been conducted.

The review ensures that all content is in line with current law and practice.

Improved content and new precedents

Updates and enhancements include:

  • a re-organised and streamlined commentary that better caters for current practice;
  • additional assistance to help the practitioner get the matter underway;
  • enhanced commentary on preparing for and attending at mediation;
  • an updated matter plan that includes links to important sections of the commentary; and
  • six new precedents – additional initial letters which cater for different circumstances regarding the estate.

101 Succession Answers (NSW)

Subscribers are reminded that the By Lawyers reference manual 101 Succession Answers (NSW) also has a large and helpful section on Family provision claims. This includes many links to relevant sections of the legislation, plus links to leading and recent cases on various aspects of Family provision claims.

101 Succession Answers (NSW) is found at the top of the Family provision claims – Acting for the plaintiff matter plan and also in the Reference materials folder.

Keep up to date with By Lawyers

These updates to our Family provision claims – Acting for the plaintiff guide, and the regular updates to 101 Succession Answers (NSW) with the latest cases on Family provision claims, are part of By Lawyers commitment to the continual enhancement of our publications. By Lawyers subscribers can be confident that their guides and precedents are always kept up to date so they can enjoy practice more.

CLE/CPD requirements – All states

by

Timely compliance with CLE/CPD requirements has suddenly become a challenge for many small law firms. This is a result of the cancellation of seminars due to COVID-19.

With their ability to attend external events unexpectedly curtailed, the burden of professional education has reverted to firms to manage in-house. And they must do so within the strictures of remaining safe from virus risks.

Fortunately, By Lawyers can make this assist.

In-house training for CLE/CPD requirements

The By Lawyers guides are a great resource for professional education.

Whether in the office or working from home, lawyers can:

  • Read the By Lawyers Commentaries – whether relevant to their current matters, or in areas of law that they seek to brush-up on, or move into;
  • Delve into the By Lawyers Reference manuals, such as 1001 Conveyancing Answers, 101 Family Law Answers or 101 Subpoena Answers – providing detailed information and current case law related to specific client issues, or general legal concepts;
  • Review and practice drafting more complex documents in various areas of law, using By Lawyers precedents – such as an affidavit and example content in a litigation matter type;
  • Have a ‘Q & A’ session with a colleague by email or video-link – where each lawyer raises questions about practice and procedure or points of law for the other person to answer from the By Lawyers guides;
  • Present to the other members of the firm on-line by referencing or screen-sharing the relevant By Lawyers guide.

Even the compulsory units on practice management and business skills can be addressed via the By Lawyers Practice Management Guide and the related Reference Manual 101 Policies and Procedures. With sections on ethics, business planning and financial management, lawyers can use these resources to present to their colleagues or read for their own benefit.

The breadth, depth and easy accessibility of By Lawyers content makes it easy for firms to comply with in-house CLE/CPD requirements under their own steam, in any way that suits them.

These are tough times for everyone; lawyers in legal practices included. Complying with the relevant CLE/CPD requirements is a real challenge. By Lawyers makes it easier.

Out of time claims – Workers Comp – NSW

by

Out of time claims under the Workers Compensation Act 1987 were considered in the recent Supreme Court decision of Hole v Gregory Ronald Lyons trading as Greg Lyons Building Constructions [2020] NSWSC 102.

Section 151D (2) of the Act provides that common law claims must be brought within 3 years of the date of injury. Out of time claims require the leave of the court in which the claim is brought. In Hole, Button J granted leave to commence proceedings some four years out of time on the basis that the plaintiff had adequately explained the delay.

Interestingly, the essence of the explanation was the plaintiff’s extended engagement in the claims process under the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998. The Court noted that: ‘…there is a whole structure, external to the Court in which litigation is to commence, in which one must engage in an effort to have the matter resolved away from Court.’

In that context, the Court also noted that this was not a case where anybody involved in the litigation was ‘taken by surprise‘, or prejudiced by the delay.

In its consideration of the matter the Court followed the principles relating to a grant of leave for out of time claims set out in Smith v Grant [2006] NSWCA 244.

These helpful cases have been added to the By Lawyers Workers Compensation (NSW) Guide. A link to s 151D has also been added to the Retainer Instructions precedent on the matter plan in that Guide.

‘To do’ list – Family provision claims – NSW

by

New precedent ‘To do’ lists have been added to the By Lawyers Family Provision Claims – Acting for the plaintiff and Acting for the estate Guides for NSW.

Many subscribers would be familiar with By Lawyers helpful ‘To do’ lists, which serve as a checklist for progress through the matter. The ‘To do’ list ensures no critical steps are missed and allows practitioners to mark-off each step and make sure they know where the matter is up to.

The new ‘To do’ lists for Family Provision claims prompts for each of the critical steps at each stage of the matter, namely:

  • Getting the matter underway – including costs disclosure
  • Settling it early – initial offers of settlement
  • The claim – preparing and filing the summons and plaintiff’s affidavit OR notice of appearance and notice to eligible persons
  • The first directions hearing
  • Mediation
  • Next directions hearing
  • Preparation for hearing
  • Hearing
  • After hearing – including advice on appeal rights.

These new precedents will assist lawyers in Family Provision claims to manage their matters, whether acting for the claimant or the estate.

Family Provision – 101 Succession Answers (NSW)

by

Two new cases on Family Provision claims have been added to the By Lawyers Reference manual 101 Succession Answers (NSW).

Affidavits and Disclosure

In Megerditchian v Khatchadourian [2019] NSWSC 1870 the court considered a number of important procedural issues, including the requirement that the plaintiff file an affidavit at the time of filing their summons and the issues relating to the form and evidentiary status of that affidavit. At [159]  the court stated:

… the purpose of the affidavit prescribed by the Practice Note is to identify, in broad terms, the plaintiff’s evidence concerning the factors enumerated in s 60(2) which may bear on the application. It will not necessarily be exhaustive, or all in admissible form, and it may be supplemented by further evidence as the case moves towards hearing.

The court also considered the plaintiff’s duty of disclosure. At [145] the court noted that:

It is well established that, in some circumstances, where a plaintiff in a family provision application fails to make full and proper disclosure of his or her financial position, the Court will refuse the application.

This case has been added to the Affidavits and Disclosure sections under Family Provision claims in 101 Succession Answers (NSW).

Disabled adult child claimant

In Cowap v Cowap [2020] NSWCA 19 the Court of Appeal considered the competing claims on an estate of a disabled adult son, the applicant/respondent, and an elderly widow, the respondent/appellant. The son was in fact a child of the widow’s previous marriage but had been adopted by the deceased.

The court at first instance granted the son provision of $600,000. This meant the widow had to sell the former matrimonial home where she had long resided with the deceased and to which she had significant emotional attachment. The son had ‘severe and permanent disability, including cognitive impairment’ because of which there was strong evidence in support of his need for provision. The widow, to whom the entire estate had been left, also had a strong claim on the estate as it was a long marriage.

The sale of the property allowed the widow to purchase another smaller property and maintain her existing income. The judge at first instance, in granting provision to the son, decided that was an appropriate outcome given the 91-year-old widow would inevitably leave the property in due course in any event.

The Court of Appeal held that the first instance judge had made no error and dismissed the appeal.

Of further interest in this case is that the Court of Appeal refused to admit on the appeal any new evidence of valuation of the property. [35].

This case has been added to the Adult Children section under Family Provision claims in 101 Succession Answers (NSW).

101 Succession Answers – NSW

by

Following an author review new cases have been added and other enhancements made to the By Lawyers Reference Manual 101 Succession Answers (NSW).

Nobarani v Mariconte [2018] HCA 36

This case supports the requirement of an ‘interested’ party wishing to challenge the validity of a will to show that they have rights which will be affected by the disputed grant of probate or administration.

Re Estates Brooker-Pain and Soulos [2019] NSWSC 671

Considerations regarding disclosure of documents and information in contested probate proceedings were extensively discussed. This case analysed the applicable law, practice and procedure in the context of applications to set aside subpoenas and notices to produce which called for documents relating to the making of the disputed wills. This included solicitors’ notes and files. The interplay between subpoenas, the court’s Practice Note SC Eq 11 and case management orders was examined in detail.

The court addressed the determination of ‘legitimate forensic purpose’ in such cases, especially where pleadings had not closed and the issues in dispute were uncertain. This decision has therefore been added to the By Lawyers Reference Manual 101 Subpoena Answers too.

The court also commented on the practice of sending ‘Larke v Nugus’ letters to ‘…a person involved in the preparation or execution of a will…[seeking] disclosures about the circumstances in which a will was prepared or executed’.

Application of NSW Trustee & Guardian; Estate of Dudley Keith Vaughn [2019] NSWSC 850 and In the Estate of Hansie Hart [2019] ACTSC 317

These two recent cases each dealt with issues relating to the presumption of death.

Gregory Joseph Mills as trustee v Julie Elizabeth Mills and Ors [2018] NSWSC 363

This case is instructive as to the considerations the court applies when giving judicial advice and determining construction issues on testamentary trusts.

Finnegan & Anor v Garner & Ors [2019] QSC 100

Here the estate faced claims which, if they were resolved by litigation would result in the estate being consumed by legal costs. The court noted, at [10], that:

It is the duty of trustees of the estate not to embark upon expensive litigation which will have the effect of depleting the estate. In Macedonian Orthodox Community Church St Petka Inc v His Eminence Petar The Diocesan Bishop of The Macedonian Orthodox Diocese of Australia and New Zealand Gummow ACJ, Kirby, Hayne and Heydon JJ said that: “a trustee who is sued should take no step in defence of the suit without first obtaining judicial advice about whether it is proper to defend the proceedings.”

Koellner v Spicer [2019] NSWSC 1571

On a family provision claim, an adult child with a medical condition and meagre financial resources was awarded a 35% legacy from the reasonably small estate even though the deceased had expressly excluded him on the basis they had no relationship.

Grant v Roberts; Smith v Smith; Roberts v Smith; Curtis v Smith [2019] NSWSC 843

The court emphasised, including by reference to the ‘overriding principles’ of the Civil Procedure Act, the duty on parties to contain costs in family provision litigation. The court heavily criticised disproportionate costs being incurred.

 

Like all By Lawyers Reference Materials, 101 Succession Answers (NSW) is updated regularly to cover developments in case law and procedure.

Land tax – NSW

by

Land tax NSW – Increases to threshold values

Land tax thresholds are indexed to rise on 1 January each year.

The 2020 threshold combined land value will increase to $734,000 for all liable land. Special trusts and non-concessional companies are excepted.

A marginal tax rate of 1.6% of the aggregate taxable value above the tax-free threshold plus $100 applies.

If the aggregate taxable value exceeds the premium rate threshold of $4,488,000 then $60,164 is payable plus a marginal tax rate of 2% over that amount.

All relevant commentary and precedents in By Lawyers Conveyancing & Property Guides have been updated accordingly.

By Lawyers wish everyone a happy holiday season.

 

Testamentary discretionary trusts – Foreign person – NSW

by

Testamentary discretionary trusts holding residential property – Surcharge duty and land tax

Where a foreign person acquires or holds residential property, duty and land tax surcharge can apply. Foreign person surcharge duty and land tax can also apply to testamentary discretionary trusts where foreign persons are beneficiaries or potential beneficiaries.

The NSW Commissioner of State Revenue issued a ruling in March 2017 allowing exemption of discretionary trusts from surcharge duty and land tax if the trust deed was amended to exclude foreign beneficiaries within six months of the exemption being granted.

The State Revenue Legislation Further Amendment Bill 2019 is currently before the NSW Parliament. If this Bill is passed, the ability to amend a trust deed to avoid the surcharge will be restricted. Once the Bill passes, the exemption is likely to be removed. The second reading speech for the Bill states: ‘the Government considers that the end of 2019 allows sufficient time for any remaining trustees and their advisers to make necessary changes to trust deeds’.

There is two-year period of grace, from the commencement of the proposed new s 104JA of the Duties Act 1997. During that period, the trustee of a testamentary discretionary trust will not be deemed a foreign person if the deceased was not a foreign person, even if the trust does not prevent a foreign person from being a beneficiary of the trust.

In order to avoid the application of surcharge duty and land tax, the By Lawyers wills creating testamentary discretionary trusts and library of testamentary discretionary trust provisions include a clause titled ‘Foreign beneficiaries’ that prohibits the trustee from making trust distributions to, or otherwise benefiting, a foreign person. The clause must also prohibit an amendment that has the effect of including a beneficiary or potential beneficiary who is a foreign person. Where it is intended for a foreign person to benefit under a testamentary discretionary trust, this clause should be appropriately amended or removed when drafting the will.

It is important to review existing testamentary trust provisions arising under a will and consider whether it is necessary to amend to avoid the application of surcharge duty and land tax.

See the commentary in the Wills (NSW) Guide for further details.

Connect with us