ByLawyers News and Updates

Foreign resident capital gains withholding clearance certificates

by

Clearance certificates will not be issued during the ATO’s Christmas closure – 22/12/17 to 2/1/18.

Power of attorney

by

By Russell Cocks, Solicitor

First published in the Law Institute Journal

Property lawyers often come across a Power of Attorney in practice and understanding the obligations of an Attorney is important.

The ability of a person (the donor) to delegate power to another (the attorney) has been recognised by the law for centuries. A common law form of Power of Attorney would be in the form of a deed and would recite the appointment by the donor of the attorney and confer power on the attorney. Traditionally such documents would run for many pages and would enumerate extensive powers that the attorney was authorised to exercise on behalf of the donor. Alternatively, the document could be limited in scope, authorising the attorney to exercise specific powers for a specific purpose.

The significance of the power conferred on the attorney was recognised as a reason for government supervision and a system of registration of powers was established. But the cost of this supervisory role was deemed excessive and the registration of powers ceased in the late 20th. century, although a limited registration process is available at the Land Titles Office for ‘heavy users’. The wheel turns in such matters and there are presently calls for law reform to again invoke a registration process.

The form of a power of attorney was governed by the Instruments Act 1958 until the Powers of Attorney Act 2014. This Act sets out in detail the requirements relating to the creation, use and revocation of powers of attorney and recognises various types of powers, the most important of which is the Enduring Power of Attorney. This is so as the common law took the view that the attorney loses power if the donor loses legal capacity and, given the importance of powers for the management of the affairs of the elderly who are susceptible to losing capacity, such a restriction undermines the effectiveness of the power. The Act therefore perpetuates the Enduring power beyond loss of capacity of the donor.

FIDUCIARY DUTY

Perhaps the most important aspect of a power of attorney is the fiduciary duty owed by the attorney to the donor. This is a common law concept and is not mentioned in the Act, although the Act does have a prohibition on the attorney entering into any transaction that may create a conflict between the interests of the donor and the interests of the attorney (s 64) and specifically prohibits the attorney from using the position to make a profit (s 63). These are the two fundamental elements of the common law fiduciary duty and to that extent the Act confirms that duty.

A recent case that considered a breach of the common law duty is Ash v Ash [2017] VSC 577. The donor appointed his daughter (who was a solicitor) as attorney in 2012. By 2014 the donor had lost capacity and the attorney made a number of transfers of the donor’s assets, including superannuation, that resulted in the donor’s assets being substantially diminished. These transfers were to entities associated with the attorney and the attorney directly benefited from these transactions.

The attorney sought to explain the transactions as flowing from previous instructions given by the donor and as a result of the attorney using her ‘signing authority’ at the donor’s bank but the court dismissed these suggestions as a ‘fiction’ and to accept that argument would be to ‘undermine the protective role inherent in the appointment of an attorney’.

The court did not suggest that an attorney can never enter into a transaction creating conflict between the interests of the donor and the attorney and recognised that ‘fully informed consent’ of the donor would justify an attorney entering into such a ‘conflict’ transaction, however the attorney failed to discharge the onus of proving that such consent had been given by the donor.

The donor was represented by a VCAT appointed administrator who successfully sought judgment against the attorney for all losses suffered as a result of the attorney’s breach of fiduciary duty and also judgment against entities associated with the attorney who had been ‘knowing assistants’ in this breach.

Had these actions taken place after 2015 the attorney may well have also been charged under s 135(3) Power of Attorney Act with committing an offence of using a power of attorney to gain financial advantage for the attorney or another person, with a possible penalty of 5 years imprisonment.

Tip Box

•Powers of Attorney create fiduciary obligations that the attorney must honour

•These obligations include a duty to avoid conflicts of interest

•Criminal penalties may apply to breach of these obligations

•Whilst written for Victoria this article has interest and relevance for practitioners in all states

NSW – Land and Property Information (LPI) name change

by

From 1 December 2017 Land and Property Information (LPI) will be renamed Land Registry Services (LRS). Their logo, website domains and email address are changing. Full details available in this announcement from LPI.

WA – Electronic lodgement for all eligible documents

by

From 1 December 2017 – Any lodgement case consisting of eligible discharges, transfers, mortgages, caveats and withdrawal of caveats must be lodged electronically. Are you E-Conveyancing ready? See our paper E-Conveyancing – Get Connected for information and implementation timelines

NSW – Contracts for the Sale of Land

by

The Conveyancing (Sale of Land) Regulations 2017 will come into force 1 September 2017 affecting contracts for the sale of land.

The main changes are to the disclosure obligations requiring the following to be annexed to the contract:

  • both the sewer mains and the connections diagrams  are now required; and
  • for a strata or community plan property ALL by laws must be attached including the model by-laws.

Changes to contract warnings include:

  • a new warning about loose fill asbestos; and
  • the swimming pools warning has been removed.

Commentary, precedents and the By Lawyers Contract for Sale of Land have all been updated.

Land transfer duty benefits

by

By Russell Cocks, Solicitor

First published in the Law Institute Journal

State Revenue Office has announced changes to the benefits available to purchasers of real estate to take effect from 1 July 2017.

Imposition of duty on transfer of land in Victoria is a significant source of revenue for the State government. It is also a significant source of angst for taxpayers and people involved in the real estate industry. Changes to the duty regime are often seen as levers for economic development and as such those changes are usually designed to achieve a politically beneficial outcome for the government.

The issue of housing affordability, particularly for first home buyers, is a hot button political issue and the duty changes are targeted at that demographic. The changes apply to contracts of sale after 1 July 2017, which may mean that the months of May and June will be ‘slow’ in this marketplace, followed by substantial uplift from July onwards.

Traditionally a first home buyer needs a minimum of the 10% deposit. Given that duty on a purchase of $500,000 is in the range of 5% the government impost is half of that hard fought for deposit. Granting an exemption or concession in relation to duty should therefore provide a substantial impetus for sales. The contrary argument is that it will simply bring more people into the market and effectively increase the price of housing by the amount of the benefit. This dispute between supply/demand will no doubt continue to occupy the attention of economists but we lawyers will move on to the practical consequences of the changes.

FIRST HOME BUYERS – both new and established homes

Full exemption for purchase price up to $600,000.

Reducing concession between $600,000 and $750,000 (no concession at $750,000).

Requirements:
  1. Purchaser and partner must qualify as ‘first home buyers’; and
  2. Purchaser must be an Australian citizen or permanent resident; and
  3. Purchaser must use property as Principal Place of Residence for a continuous period of 12 months commencing within 12 months of possession.

Importantly in the new home market, the ‘dutiable amount’ is calculated after taking into account deductions relating to the cost of construction post-contract.

One segment of the new home market is based on the first home buyer purchasing the land and then entering into a separate building contract for construction. In this case the dutiable value is based on the land contract and will normally come within the full exemption available up to $600,000. However another method has the first home buyer enter into a land and building contract for the total value of the land and construction. This may have a contract price above the $600,000 threshold but the exemption is available if the value of the land as at the date of the contract is below $600,000. Adopting the Fixed Percentage Method of allocating value in such cases will mean that the full exemption will be available so long as an amount equal to 55% of the contract price is below $600.000, allowing for total contract prices of well over $1m.

This takes us into the realms of:

OFF THE PLAN SALES

Substantial duty concessions have always been available in Victoria in relation to off the plan sales. The availability of this concession is to be limited after 1 July 2017 to properties to be used by the purchaser as their principal place of residence.

The concession is available where the dutiable value of the property is less than $550,000. Importantly, the calculation of dutiable value allows for deduction from the contract price of an amount that represents the value of construction to be undertaken after the date of the contract and prior to settlement. The Fixed Percentage Method of calculation of post-contract construction cost allocates cost as follows:

Single dwelling
  • Construction cost 45%
  • Land component 55%
Multi-lot
  • Construction cost 60%
  • Land component 40%
High rise
  • Construction cost 75%
  • Land component 25%

If a purchaser signs a contract before any construction commences the dutiable value will be below the $550,000 threshold provided that the contact price is less than:

  • Single dwelling $1,000,000
  • Multi lot $1,375,000
  • High rise $2,200,000

and duty will be calculated at the concession rate available to purchasers who intend to occupy the property as their principal place of residence.

The concession that was previously available for investment properties and commercial developments will cease as at 30 June 2017 and the concession will only apply to owner-occupied properties.

Disclosure of death

by

By Russell Cocks, Solicitor

First published in the Law Institute Journal

Does a vendor of real estate have an obligation to disclose that a death occurred on the property in the past?

The underlying principle governing the relationship at common law between a vendor and a purchaser is caveat emptor – let the purchaser beware. The application of that principle would mean that a purchaser should conduct its own inquiries in relation to the antecedents of the property and that the vendor has no obligation to voluntarily disclose the circumstances of any deaths and, indeed, whether such deaths occurred.

The vendor could not actively mislead the purchaser, as misrepresentation is an exception to caveat emptor, but only in the limited circumstances of a positive misrepresentation. Misrepresentation by silence is not known to the common law in this regard and a vendor who avoided making any positive misrepresentations was safe.

However the vendor’s common law disclosure obligations have been substantially supplemented by the statutory obligations set out in s 32 Sale of Land Act 1962. These include the obligation to disclose title restrictions, planning obligations and the service of any notices affecting the land, but none of the many obligations imposed by s 32 appear to extend to an obligation to disclose that a death occurred on the property.

There is much to be said for the argument that a vendor should not have any obligation in this regard. There are many practical difficulties of deciding which deaths attract the obligation. A sensational murder immediately prior to sale might attract the obligation, but what of the natural death of a long term owner? There are infinite possibilities between these two situations and striking a fair balance would be difficult. And would the obligation be limited to death? What about other crimes like drug production or paedophilia? The law must not shy away from difficult tasks, but these practical considerations highlight the potential difficulties.

Some American States, which also apply caveat emptor, have created specific disclosure obligations for what are known as ‘stigmatised properties’, which cover not only death but also other criminal activity and, perhaps only in America, paranormal activity. An arbitrary period of 3 years prior to sale (or leasing) provides some recognition that death is a natural event.

Estate Agents

Agents are subject to regulation designed to protect both vendor and purchaser. Thus, whilst the vendor might not owe a duty to the purchaser, the agent does.

A NSW case involving the sale of a home in which two sons had murdered their parents led to an outcry and the vendors voluntarily terminated the contract, preventing a Court determination of the issue. However the agent was found guilty of disciplinary charges for failing to inform the prospective purchaser and NSW agents are now subject to a specific rule requiring them to bring such matters to the attention of the purchaser. New Zealand has similar requirements in relation to suicide.

No such specific ethical obligation exists for Victorian agents but there is a general duty of honesty and best practice that might be used as a basis for a claim by a purchaser. Agents are also subject to the general duties not to mislead or deceive, positively or by silence, created by the Australian Consumer Law and this is likely to be the direction of attack from a disaffected purchaser.

Charles Lloyd Property Group Pty Ltd v Buchanan [2013] VSC 148

This case provides some hope that the Walls of Jericho will not crumble in the face of the trumpets playing the ACL tune. The purchaser sought to avoid a contract based on post-contract discovery that a suicide had occurred on the land. There were many factors against the purchaser, not least of which was a confirmation of the contract by the purchaser AFTER the knowledge of the suicide had been acquired, that resulted in the failure of the complaint but it was somewhat re-assuring that the Court found that the complaint should be dismissed as it ‘had no reasonable prospect of success’.

Tip Box

  • Whilst written for Victoria this article has interest and relevance for practitioners in all states.
  • Properties may be stigmatised by criminal activity.
  • Vendors presently probably have no disclosure obligations.
  • Estate agents may be obliged to disclose as a result of their duty to purchaser.

Connect with us