ByLawyers News and Updates

By Lawyers is going global!

by

BY LAWYERS IS GOING GLOBAL

By Lawyers is excited to announce that in February 2019 we will be launching our online guides and precedents in the United Kingdom. Our UK team is already on the ground working on content with our UK authors – practising lawyers in the various UK jurisdictions.

In the UK, we will duplicate the successful Australian By Lawyers system to give UK lawyers the same real time access to law, matter plans and precedents that are an integral part of practice for their Australian colleagues.

We also wish to assure our Australian clients that it will be very much business as usual at home for our Australian editorial and publishing teams. We have appointed a new management team for By Lawyers Australia to ensure that our Australian publications continue to expand and improve – and remain always up to date, of course.

We have pleasure introducing Brad Watts as the new Managing Director of By Lawyers Australia.

Many of you know Brad already a contributing author and more recently our senior consultant. Brad will take the reigns of By Lawyers Australia from today, reporting to our Chief Executive Officer, Bobbi Young, Chief Operating Officer Danni Larney and the Global Editor in Chief Guy Dawson. Brad will be ably assisted by our new General Manager Paul Maher, previously Legal Editor, and the rest of our wonderful in-house team – plus the 45 practising lawyers across Australia who are our external authors and who help us keep our content relevant, practical and up to date.

We sincerely thank our Australian subscribers for their support over the last decade and we look forward to continuing to assist them to enjoy practice more.

By Lawyers is very proud to be taking our great Australian product to the world.

Intervention orders – Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme – South Australia

by

Under a trial of a new Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme which commenced on 2 October 2018, a person who may be at risk of domestic violence is now able to get information about their partner or former partner, to help make decisions about their safety and the future of the relationship.

A request for information can be made by either the person who is feeling unsafe in their relationship or a person concerned about the welfare of someone they know.

Such information might include any convictions the partner or former partner has for relevant offences, any relevant reports made to police and any charges or current and historical intervention orders. This information will be passed on to a specialist domestic and family violence worker, who will contact the applicant to arrange a meeting.

A request for information can be made online or at any local police station. Applicants will be required to undertake not to spread, publish or misuse such information.

It is untested at this stage whether, or to what extent, information disclosed could be used in an affidavit or other evidence seeking an interim or final intervention order. It would appear that possession of such information would constitute a legitimate forensic purpose for the issue a subpoena to Police covering the relevant material, if an applicant seeks to rely upon such information.

When acting for a defendant, it is important to explain that future partners, or third parties on their behalf, may have the ability to access information about current or historical intervention orders under the Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme.

The By Lawyers Intervention Orders (SA) Guide has been updated to include commentary on the disclosure scheme and developments as to its application in practice will be monitored.

Grow your legal practice – NSW

by

GROW YOUR LEGAL PRACTICE – PANEL DISCUSSION

There are many challenges facing today’s small law firms. Recently, LEAP have conducted a study with their clients, exploring the challenges commonly associated with running a small legal practice. This research reveals that in the first year of operations, 67% of firms complain of spending too much time on administrative tasks, 57% struggle with attracting new clients, 40% find it difficult to manage cashflow and 44% are not able to attain a healthy work-life balance.

On Thursday, 11th October LEAP are hosting a networking breakfast event in Sydney with the sole purpose of helping small law firms address these challenges. Our own editor Brad Watts will join a panel of experts, Rose Dravitzki (Clarence Chambers), Roxanne Hart (oLegal) and Youssef Maksisi (Maksisi Lawyers), to explore the topic of effective practice management.

During this interactive presentation, the panellists will draw on their many years of legal experience and share their personal stories of starting and managing their own practices. Attendees can look forward to engaging with the speakers and hopefully taking away some practical tips and strategies enabling them to differentiate, grow and enjoy their own practices.

Whether you are looking for new ways to grow your legal practice, need some new ideas for the management of your firm, or are simply curious to hear from others about the approaches taken to build and develop their practices, we invite you to attend this free event. We also encourage you to come with plenty of questions for the panel and make the most of the substantial amount of experience LEAP have collected together for this event.

REGISTER TODAY

For those unable to attend, the By Lawyers Practice Management Guide and the related Reference Manual 101 Policies & Procedures are always available to assist By Lawyers and LEAP subscribers with practice management ideas and issues.

 

De-regulated Contract of Sale of Land

by

By Russell Cocks, Solicitor

First published in the Law Institute Journal

What are the consequences of the sunsetting of the regulations prescribing the standard Contract of Sale of Land?

The Estate Agents (Contracts) Regulations 2008 reached their sunset date on 11 August 2018, pursuant to the Subordinate Legislation Act 1994. As a consequence, those regulations, and amending regulations in 2011 and 2014, are revoked. The standard form contract almost universally used in Victoria for the sale of land is described in those now revoked regulations as the ‘prescribed’ contract and the thought that the prescribed contract has now lost its regulatory basis would appear, at first glance at least, to be a worrying development.

However, fear not. The ‘prescription’ only relates to the form of contract to be used by a licenced real estate agent. It does not prescribe the form of contract that may be prepared by a legal practitioner or conveyancer.

Section 91 Estate Agents Act 1980 authorises the making of regulations specifying the form of contracts to be used by estate agents. For many years the Law Institute of Victoria developed a standard form contract that was adopted as the prescribed contract and printed in the Regulations for use by estate agents. In fact, estate agents, in real estate sales at least, rarely prepare their own contract and usually request a contract from the vendor’s legal practitioner or conveyancer. As the ‘prescribed’ form is acknowledged as a universally accepted form and is available without charge as a public document, it is the form in common use. Proprietary conveyancing programs are permitted to replicate the form prescribed in the regulations and the LIV and REIV sell their version of the form (with appropriate logos) to their members in print or digital form.

The revocation of the Regulations notionally leaves that minority of estate agents who choose to prepare contracts, rather than requesting them from legal practitioners or conveyancers, without a prescribed form of contract. But s 53A Estate Agents Act 1980 authorises agents to use contracts that are approved by a professional association within the meaning of the Legal Profession Act 2004 and the prescribed contract was so approved by the LIV before being prescribed in the Regulations and the revocation of the Regulation does not affect that approval, at least at present.

The short answer for estate agents concerned by this development is to stop preparing contracts and request contracts from the vendor’s legal practitioner or conveyancer. This, with respect, is simply good practice in any event.

The de-regulation has no effect on legal practitioners, who are free to adopt any form of contract, subject to other statutory constraints such as the Australian Consumer Law and Fair Trading Act 2012. Whilst the current contract does include a warranty in GC2 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 as proof of the form of the de-regulated contract will remain possible from parliamentary records. Thus, we can expect that the ‘prescribed’ contract will continue in general use into the near future.

Allowing the Regulations to sunset appears to have been a deliberate choice by the government. This may be due to a desire by the government to undertake wide ranging reform of the property law sector as a result of the Consumer Property Law Review 2016. That Review investigated a proposal to prescribe a form of contract of sale of land that would be obligatory for ALL sales, or at least to prescribe certain minimum terms that would be obligatory in all contracts. Whilst those proposals have not as yet seen the light of day, the decision to allow the Regulations to sunset without replacement indicates that changes might not be far away. Indeed, the government could have chosen to extend the Regulation for a further 12 months, but apparently decided not to do so.

It would be fair to say that recent changes, including CGT and GST Withholding, have resulted in unwieldy Special Conditions being introduced into the LIV contract. Whether the deregulation of the contract and the other changes that may flow from the Review will result in other forms of contract becoming common is yet to be seen but the life of a property lawyer, despite widely held expectations to the contrary, is never dull.

Tip Box

  • ‘Prescribed’ contract regulations revoked.
  • Only affects estate agents.
  • Does not affect legal practitioners or conveyancers.

Lost trust deeds

by

By Russell Cocks, Solicitor

First published in the Law Institute Journal

Many properties are held in the name of Trustees. Having access to the original Trust Deeds can present problems.

Property lawyers often have to deal with properties owned by trustees, either corporate or individuals, and this adds another layer of complication to what is regarded by the public as the ‘simple’ process of conveyancing. Often the client is not even aware that the property is owned by a trustee, or at best has a minimal understanding of the consequences of such ownership. The process is complicated even further when the transactions involves a financier, which is often the case.

The concept of a trust has been around for centuries, but its impact on day to day transactions greatly increased in the 1970s and 80s when accountants decided that the trust concept provided substantial advantages for the average taxpayer, partly as an asset protection mechanism but principally as a tax-saving device by distribution of income within the family. Hence the prevalence of the ubiquitous Family Trust that seemed to push its way between the Average Joe (or Josephine) and their assets. In fact, the asset protection motivation was quickly dissipated by financiers requiring personal guarantees in respect of trust borrowings and the tax benefits were whittled away by the imposition of maximum tax rates on income directed to infants. But like a runaway horse, once mounted, it is difficult to get off a Family Trust.

The Family Discretionary Trust typically consists of a trust deed with extensive Trustee powers recited in standard form and then a Schedule setting out the particulars relevant to the particular trust. Such documents were often purchased ‘off the shelf’, much the same as company incorporation documents, and as they were a mechanism designed principally for tax minimisation, little regard was had to the niceties of trust law. Four copies of the Trust Deed would usually be executed, with the accountant, lawyer and client having a copy each and the fourth copy generally staying with either the lawyer or the accountant. It would be fair to say that the execution process might not always be carefully undertaken and some of the four copies might remain unsigned. From time to time financiers might seek copies of the Deed and a prudent lawyer, accountant or client would hopefully ensure that the original Deeds were held in safekeeping but, as is fitting for a document that was designed to record a fantasy, that was often not the case.

Forty or fifty years after these structures were put in place, problems are arising when the original documents cannot be found. The purpose of the documents were to record the Trustee as the legal owner of assets, both real estate and personal property such as bank accounts and shares, and when it comes time to deal with these assets the Trust Deed establishing the Trustees right to deal may need to be produced. This situation was considered by the Supreme Court in Application by South Melbourne Continental P/L 2018 [VSC] 398.

This was a typical situation of a small business established by a patriarch thirty-five years previously that had been conducted successfully over those years, held substantial assets and was now ‘operated’ by a son on behalf of the family. But the Trust Deed could not be found and this presented problems in dealing with the assets and the business generally. The Supreme Court has a number of powers relating to trust property, including Order 54 Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2015 and an ability to make orders under the Trustee Act 1958. However, the Application was unsuccessful as the McMillan J. was not satisfied that all possible attempts to locate the Trust Deeds had been carried out and it may be concluded from the judgment that the powers vested in the Court will not be made available without extensive evidence relating to the original terms of the Trust Deed and the attempts to locate the documents.

This outcome may be contrasted with the successful Application in D.R.McKendry Nominees P/L 2015 [VSC] 560 where an argument based on the presumption of regularity, that does not appear to have been argued in South Melbourne Continental, was successful. A similar argument found favour with McMillan J. in a case concerning a lost Superannuation Deed in Re Thomson 2015 [VSC] 370.

Vendor statement now automated in By Lawyers Contract – VIC

by

Vendor statement now automated!

We are excited to announce that the By Lawyers Contract of sale of land (VIC), which makes things easier by incorporating the vendor statement, has now been updated to include intuitive automation, to assist users when they are creating the vendor statement.

Upon opening the precedent document, the user is prompted to make a series of elections by the use of check boxes – and text boxes are also included where a description is required.

Users simply select and input the relevant information to be included, which is then automatically generated in the document, showing only relevant disclosure information.

This process reduces the time required to complete a vendor statement, reduces the risk of a disclosure being defective due to error and results in a statement that is much more readable.

Just another way that By Lawyers is making the practice of law a little more enjoyable.

 

Combustible cladding – Conveyancing – QLD

by

New regulations for combustible cladding

From 1 October 2018, amendments by the Building and Other Legislation (Cladding) Amendment Regulation 2018 (QLD) (the Regulation) to the Building Regulation 2006 (QLD) require owners of private buildings to undertake a three-stage process, managed through an online system, to identify whether a building is affected by combustible cladding.

Buildings covered by the Regulation are class 2-9 buildings of Type A or Type B construction for which building approval was given after 1 January 1994 and before 1 October 2018.

The Queensland Building and Construction Commission (QBCC) is the regulator responsible for the online checklist and register.

For further information on the three-stage rollout, see the QBCC website.

Duties of an owner on sale of affected property

A change of building ownership attracts statutory duties for building owners. If one or more of the relevant stages has been completed, an owner must give the new owner:

  • notice, in the approved form, about the extent to which the original owner has complied with Part 4A; and
  • copies of each document given by the original owner to the QBCC under Part 4A.

They must also give the QBCC a copy of the notice given to the new owner. Failure to do so may attract a maximum penalty of up to 20 penalty units.

The By Lawyers Conveyancing (QLD) publication has been updated accordingly.

New article by Donna Cooper on Wills and POAs – VIC

by

By Lawyers is pleased to be able to share with you Donna Cooper’s article, Should you hand over a copy of a will to an attorney under power?, published in the Reference material folder in our Will, Powers and Estates VIC publications.

Donna’s article commences:

Consider the following common ethical dilemma: You have a long standing elderly client whose adult son telephones to say that he’s moving his mother into a nursing home and would like to come in to a collect a copy of her will from your office this afternoon.  You know the adult son and you are aware of the fact that he is the sole attorney under power for his mother as well as the sole executor of her estate.  He tells you that his mother has recently lost capacity and is not capable of managing her affairs.  Should you hand over a copy of the will to him when he arrives this afternoon?

Donna’s article considers:

  • the duty of confidentiality a solicitor owes to the principal;
  • the application of the Powers of Attorney Act 2014 (Vic) to various scenarios;
  • the options available to a solicitor when approached by an attorney seeking access to the principal’s will; and
  • guidance including the 2013 Succession Laws Report from the Victorian Law Reform Commission and Ethics Committee Ruling R4839, published in 2015 by the Law Institute of Victoria’s Ethics Committee.

Donna Cooper is an Ethics Consultant with ethics4lawyers and an Australian legal practitioner. Donna’s very practical and considered article first appeared in the Institute of Legal Executives September-October 2018 journal, The Legal Executive.

Fees Update – Supreme Court Probate Office – VIC

by

New probate filing fees

On 30 September 2018 the Supreme Court (Fees) Regulations 2018 introduces new filing fees for the Supreme Court of Victoria’s probate office.

The By Lawyers Victorian Estates Guide have been updated to reflect these changes.

Supervised legal practice – A new podcast from By Lawyers and LEAP

by

Many small firms have lawyers on the team who are still in their first two years of practice and therefore subject to a condition on their practising certificate that they may only engage in supervised legal practice.

Join our Senior Consultant and Editor Brad Watts and LEAP National Marketing Manager Claire James for a discussion on the ways in which proper supervision is important for both the firm and for junior lawyers and how it can be an essential element of running a successful small law firm, as a means to ensure delivery of high quality client outcomes and a vital risk management tool.

The President of the NSW Law Society recently highlighted the importance of senior practitioners meeting their supervisory obligations to junior practitioners who are subject to the restriction of supervised legal practice in their first 2 years. This podcast discusses the factors which impact – and sometimes impede – proper supervision in small legal practices and how the By Lawyers guides and precedents can help firms comply with their supervision requirements.

The podcast covers the general supervision requirements and also looks at some specific By Lawyers precedents which can assist firms with their supervision obligations, such as Retainer Instructions and To Do lists.

Oh, and with some help from John Grisham, we also learn why Australian lawyers are better than American lawyers!

 

Connect with us