On 20 August 2015, Sladen Legal’s Phil Broderick delivered a presentation on Transferring Real Estate In and Out of SMSFs, as part of The Tax Institute’s National Superannuation Conference.

Phil’s presentation considered a number of issues in relation to the holding of real estate in SMSFs and the transfer of real estate in and out of SMSFs.

On 1 September 2015, Sladen Legal’s Phil Broderick delivered a presentation on Seamlessly Integrating Superannuation into Effective Estate Planning, as part the Legalwise seminar topic of Estate Planning: Maximising Asset Protection.

On 1 September 2015, the Powers of Attorney Act 2014 (The Act) introduced new civil and criminal penalties for misuse of an enduring power of attorney. The new penalties include a fine of up to $91,000 or up to five years imprisonment.

The Productivity Commission will shortly commence a 12 month wholesale review of Australia’s intellectual property regime.  The Government has recognised that with a rapidly changing global economy and new technologies, there is a need to ensure that there is an appropriate balance between intellectual property protection and competition.  The review was recommended in the extensive Harper Report on Competition Policy, which noted that excessive intellectual property protection can ‘not only discourage adoption of new technologies but also stifle innovation’.

From 1 September 2015, the witnessing requirements for an enduring power of attorney have been significantly tightened.

The signing of an enduring power of attorney by the principal (the person giving the power) must be witnessed by two people. One of these witnesses must be either a person who is authorised to witness affidavits (such as lawyers, judges, members of the police force ranked sergeant or above, parliamentarians or justices of the peace) or a medical practitioner. Previously, it was only a requirement that one of the witnesses needed to be authorised to witness statutory declarations.

The very public dispute between mining magnate Gina Rinehart and her children over access to family wealth held in a Family Trust came to a head this year, when the NSW Supreme Court appointed one of Gina’s 4 children (Bianca) as the new trustee of the Family Trust in place of Gina. 

The Family Trust, in effect, owned a 24% shareholding in Hancock Prospecting Pty Ltd (HPPL) and HHPL owned all the shares in the company which has an interest in an iron ore mine at Hope Downs.  Bianca and her brother, John, had issued court proceedings against their mother to remove her as trustee so they could access their share of the Trust’s assets. 

A new type of power of attorney is now available, effective 1 September. A person (referred to as the principal) can now appoint a “supportive attorney”.

New powers of attorneys will come into effect in Victoria from 1 September 2015.

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.