BE CAREFUL WHAT YOUR WILL DOES—AND DOES NOT—CONTEMPLATE

Section 12 of the Succession Act 2006 (NSW) provides that a will is revoked by marriage unless that will was made in contemplation of marriage.  Practically, a will made in contemplation of marriage usually contains an express statement to that effect.  This was not the case in the recent Supreme Court case, Re Estate Grant, deceased [2018] NSWSC 1031 and the Court needed to determine whether the testator had made his will in contemplation of marriage.

SUPERANNUATION NOMINATIONS AND ENDURING POWERS OF ATTORNEY

An interesting question has recently appeared in estate planning.  Can an attorney under an enduring power of attorney make, alter or revoke a superannuation binding death benefit nomination (“BDBN”) for their principal if the principal lacks mental capacity?   By analogy to wills some people may think that an attorney cannot do such acts.  While it is settled in law that a principal cannot delegate to their attorney a power to make, alter or revoke a will, the recent Supreme Court of Queensland decision of
Re Narumon Pty Ltd [2018] QSC 185 shows that in some circumstances an attorney may make or alter a BDBN.  

DON’T HATE WHEN A CUSTOMER IS LATE (IN PAYING YOUR INVOICE)

If you have a customer who is tardy with paying your invoices then you’ll need to be careful you don’t SHOUT when demanding that they pay.  The recent decision of Trenfield v HAG Import Corporation (Australia) Pty Limited (No. 2) in the Queensland District Court involved the question of whether a creditor reasonably suspected that a debtor was insolvent.  The creditor wrote in an email to the debtor that they were unable to pay their debts and in a follow up email the creditor demanded payment “in a much larger font, which I suspect is the email equivalent of shouting”, so said Justice McGill in his judgment.  In this case the shouting email worked against the creditor.

AirBnB here to stay (for now)

Airbnb has undoubtedly changed the short-term leasing market in Australia and many Owners Corporations are unhappy with the change.  In response, one Owners Corporation in Woolhara passed a by-law which had the effect of banning short-term letting in the building.  In a landmark decision by the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (“NCAT”), it held that the Owners Corporation did not have power to make such a by-law.