Legislation was introduced into Federal Parliament recently which, if passed, will significantly change the rules regarding foreign investment in Australia, particularly in relation to the acquisition of properties by foreign entities.

The Road Safety Remuneration Tribunal (RSRT) has issued a draft road safety remuneration order (draft Order) and statement on minimum payments for contractor drivers.

Real property is a popular investment for SMSFs (self managed superannuation funds). However, there are a number of unique issues that come with SMSFs receiving, holding and disposing of real estate. In this paper I have examined a number of those issues in great detail.

In the case of Stellard Pty Ltd & Anor v North Queensland Fuel Pty Ltd [2015], the Queensland Supreme Court recently held that negotiations via a chain of emails resulted in a binding contract, despite the email communication stating that the terms of agreement were subject to a signed contract. The judgment serves as a warning to those involved in the negotiation of a contract via email correspondence.

The recent case of Hockey v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd provides an interesting example of the application of Australia’s defamation laws to social media publications and matters of public interest.

Treasurer, Joe Hockey brought a defamation claim against three newspaper publishers in regards to articles published on 5 May 2014 in the Sydney Morning Herald, The Age, The Canberra Times and online platforms controlled by those newspapers. The articles detailed the operations of a club, the North Sydney Forum and its connection to the Liberal Party. The articles said that through the North Sydney Forum, Mr Hockey was providing "privileged access" to a select group in return for donations to the Liberal Party without full disclosure to the election funding authorities. The words "Treasurer for Sale" or "Treasurer Hockey for Sale" were prominent in the articles. Although critical of the fundraising activities, the articles included some balancing comments and stated that the fundraising activities were legal.

In June 2015, an article written by Sladen Legal's Sam Campbell titled "Do trustees no longer have unlimited assessment periods?" was published in the Tax Institute’s Journal, Taxation in Australia.

This article discusses whether a new law administration practice statement will give trustees comfort that the Australian Taxation Office will not issue an assessment outside of the normal 2/4 year periods.

Read the published article.

For some time now, the Productivity Commission (Commission) has been undertaking a public inquiry to examine the performance of the workplace relations framework in Australia and to identify improvements to it.

Today, the Commission released its hotly anticipated draft inquiry report. The report outlines the key issues identified so far during the inquiry, discusses some of the draft recommendations and findings, and outlines how stakeholders will be able to provide feedback.

On 19 February 2015, the ATO issued PS LA 2015/2. An early candidate in the ATO’s ongoing campaign to redesign (and rewrite) law administration practice statements (LAPS),1 PS LA 2015/2 seeks to explain

The Federal Court has revoked a decision made by the Fair Work Commission (FWC) to approve the Swinburne University of Technology’s 2014 enterprise agreement (EA), due to the inclusion of casual or sessional employees in the voting process.

In February 2014 the University requested staff to vote in favour of the agreement, including individuals who had been engaged as sessional employees during the 2013 academic year. The University considered 2005 of the votes cast to be valid, and made an application to the FWC for approval based on a slim 57 majority votes in favour of the agreement.

A recent judgment of the New South Wales Supreme Court serves as an important reminder that verbal agreements can be just as enforceable as written agreements. In the case of Yulema Pty Ltd & Anor v Simmons & Anor [2015], the Supreme Court upheld contractual obligations imposed by a verbal agreement in October 2009. As a result, the defendant was required to pay the plaintiff approximately $350,000 plus interest from May 2011. It is significant to note that the Court upheld the agreement notwithstanding that one of the parties involved in the negotiations was unable to give evidence because they had passed away.

On 10 June 2015, the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) released two draft taxation determinations and a draft taxation ruling, outlining its proposed treatment of unpaid present entitlements (UPEs) for the purposes of bad debt write-offs, Div 7A, and the maximum net asset value test.

In a recent case in the Federal Circuit Court an employer; Corrective Services New South Wales, was ordered to pay a former probation and parole officer employed by it the sum of $180,000 plus interest as a result of discriminatory treatment of her.  The employee suffered from Crohn’s Disease and took sick leave on a number of occasions.

The unfair contract provisions under the Australian Consumer Law (ACL) provide that terms in “standard form” contracts that are “unfair” under the legislation can be declared void. The provisions apply to contracts for the supply of goods or services or a sale or grant of an interest in land for personal, domestic or household use or consumption. There are similar provisions in the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001  applying to the sale of financial products and services.

The phrase “without prejudice” is commonly overused and misunderstood. When using the phrase, people should be mindful that simply labelling communication “without prejudice” does not automatically guarantee the privilege. Rather, the surrounding circumstances and the content of the communication will be taken into consideration when determining whether the privilege applies.

The 2015/16 new financial year commencing this Wednesday will also bring into effect new minimum pay rates and thresholds.

According to the Fair Work Commission (FWC), from 1 July 2015, the following changes will take effect

The Government has released the Tax and Superannuation Laws Amendment (2015 Measures No. 2) Bill 2015 which, if passed in its current form, will provide for “look through” tax treatment for trusts set up for limited recourse borrowing arrangements (LRBA).

In effect, this means that, from a tax law perspective (except for certain limited exceptions), the asset of the LRBA trust will be deemed to be held by the super fund and the actions of the trustee of the LRBA trust in relation to the asset will be deemed to be the actions of the trustee of the super fund. This will reduce adverse tax consequences (eg capital gains tax on collapsing the trust, losses being trapped in the trust and difficulties of passing franking credits) and result in a reduction to tax administration (eg the trust will not require a TFN or be required to prepare a tax return). It also means that, from a tax law perspective, super funds no longer need a bare trust for a LRBA in order to achieve a look through approach.

In April 2015, an article written by Sladen Legal's Phil Broderick and Melissa Brazzale, was published in the Tax Institute’s Journal, Taxation in Australia.

This article addresses the need for directors of corporate trustees to beware, as breaches of their fiduciary duties can result in amounts taken out of the trust, including super contributions, being clawed back.

The New South Wales Court of Appeal adopted a traditional and technical approach to the interpretation of the terms of a trust deed when dismissing an appeal in the decision in Segelov v Ernst & Young Services Pty Ltd.

For super purposes, turning 55 has traditionally been the year in which you start to access your benefits (for example under a transition to retirement income stream (TRIS)). However, with the auto-rise of the preservation age coming into effect, as of 1 July 2015, persons turning 55 in the 2015/16 year will have to wait until they turn 56 (ie in the 2016/17 year).

The attached presentation was delivered by Sladen Legal’s Rob Jeremiah and Phil Broderick at the Tax Institute’s Trusts & Estates Club on 17 June, 2015.

In this presentation, Rob discussed “Beneficial interests” in and “beneficial ownership” of trust property – trustees, trusts and beneficiaries, while Phil addressed issues about Superannuation and insurance – the good, the bad and the ugly.