Recent Changes
Changes to District Court Practice Note No. 1 – Case Management in the General List
Recent Decisions
Presidential decision on ‘substantial contributing factor’ (section 9A of the 1987 Act)
E-Dry Pty Ltd v Ker [2017] NSWWCCPD 26 (15 June 2017)
Introduction
It is common practice for trade creditors to obtain security from debtors in credit application terms in the form of a charge over land provided and then proceed to have a caveat registered against the debtor’s land. An issue can arise when there are competing caveat interests over the debtor’s land and not enough money to satisfy all the claims.
Creditor’s interest in land
Summary
On 12 November 2016, a new law came into effect that voided unfair terms in standard form contracts with small businesses.
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has now claimed its first scalp under this new law with the Federal Court decision in Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v JJ Richards & Sons Pty Ltd [2017] FCA 1224.
Background
Summary
In October 2017, the NSW Court of Appeal upheld a District Court ruling for the defendant in respect of liability arising out of a motor vehicle collision involving an ambulance that had entered an intersection on a red light when responding to an emergency.
In both the primary and appeal decisions, the ambulance driver was held to have acted as a reasonable person would in the circumstances, weighing up competing priorities such as social utility and the risk of harm pursuant to section 5B of the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW).
JC Automotive Repairs Pty Ltd v John Hardy [2017] NSWSC 1218
Welcome to the October edition of our Financial Services Bulletin
Mobis Parts Australia Pty Ltd v XL Insurance Company SE (No 7) [2017] NSWSC 1321
Published | krystal prasad
Jennifer Jackson, Rehabilitation Consultant, CommInsure, has been awarded this year’s prestigious ALUCA TurksLegal Scholarship for her outstanding essay on genetic testing. In her thoughtful and well researched paper, Jennifer highlighted the strengths and weaknesses of the Australian life insurance industry’s current approach to this issue, how other comparable countries are choosing to handle this issue and provided well researched recommendations on how we as an industry should respond.
Phoenixing is the registering of a new company to take-over the failed or insolvent business of another company. While phoenix activity does not always involve illegal conduct, illegal phoenix activity has attracted significant media and public scrutiny – and rightly so. Illegal phoenix activity involves company directors deliberately trying to avoid paying liabilities such as taxation debts and employee entitlements.