The government’s previously announced amnesty for unpaid superannuation guarantee payments, which lapsed will the calling of the previous election, has been reintroduced into parliament in the in the Treasury Laws Amendment (Recovering Unpaid Superannuation) Bill 2019.
Sladen Legal have launched Sladen Learning, an online professional development platform delivering interactive, specialist courses to professionals Australia wide. Developed by the team of lawyers at Sladen Legal, Sladen Learning combines information, resources and activities to deliver engaging and educational short courses.
Sladen Legal’s Daniel Smedley, Neil Brydges and Phil Broderick have received recognition in the 12th Edition of The Best Lawyers in Australia. The list of impressive legal professionals was announced in the Australian Financial Review on 22 March 2019.
The case of Re Marsella; Marsella v Wareham  VSC 312 (13 June 2018) concerned a claim by the widower of the willmaker for further provision from the estate of the deceased pursuant to Part IV of the Administration and Probate Act 1958.
What is “better” for paying out death benefits in a self managed superannuation fund (SMSF) - a binding death benefit nomination (BDBN) or trustee discretion? As a result of a number of cases, where BDBNs were found to be defective, trustee discretion was becoming a favoured method for some advisors.
In a recent case of Nifuno Pty Ltd atf Stephen Forbes Pension Fund v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue  NSWCATOD 3, the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT) considered the application of an available duty concession for the transfer of property in connection with persons changing superannuation funds, including self-managed superannuation funds (SMSFs).
Treasury Laws Amendment (2018 Measures No. 4) Bill 2018 has now passed both houses of parliament. The Bill includes the following measures to increase the ability of the ATO to enforce the super guarantee laws.
The decision of Burgess v Burgess is another case which considers conflicts of interest in the context of paying super death benefits. It follows a number of recent similar cases, including Re Narumon Pty Ltd, Brine v Carter and McIntosh v McIntosh. The strong consistent theme across all of these cases is that the Courts will strictly uphold fiduciary duties (even if they have “unfair” outcomes).
The Victorian Supreme Court in the decision of MD Commercial Pty Ltd & AJ Commercial Pty Ltd v Commissioner of State Revenue  VSC 560 confirmed that certain transfers of land to trustees were not exempt from duty under section 35 of the Duties Act 2000.
We previously reported on the Federal Court decision of Aussiegolfa v FTC here and here. The Full Federal Court has now handed down its appeal decision. This case is an important because it considers two key planks of the superannuation prudential standards, the in-house asset rules and the sole purpose test. This snippet looks at the latter, another snippet looks at the former.