Saveen Mathews

As reported by The Australian Financial Review, The College of Law Australia's 2024 Legal Salary Survey showed the gender pay gap among commercial lawyers remains “stubbornly and frustratingly high”, despite law firms’ efforts to promote women. College of Law CEO, Neville Carter, explained to reporter Maxim Shanahan that the findings were both “confounding and troubling” highlighting the fact the pay gap even exists at entry level and within the first five years of practice. On the topic of pandemic-era pay increases for juniors, Neville indicated some normality has returned to the market. "There’s a new stability and cautiousness in the large employers. But not enough to effect the differentiation between the large firms and the rest of the legal industry." Read on for more and head to the College of Law website next week for key insights into the Australian Legal Salary Survey 2024 report.

21

[AU] As in-house counsel, it is essential to ensure your business contracts do not contain unfair contract terms. Consumers and small businesses are protected from such terms under the Australian Consumer Law, and if your business is not compliant, you risk severe penalties and reputational damage. To help you protect your business, LegalVision is hosting a free webinar on ‘Unfair Contract Terms: Legal Update for In-House Counsel’. Join us on Thursday, 27 June, at 11 am AEST when Stephen Drysdale (Senior Lawyer) and Tim Jones (Lawyer) discuss: + what are unfair contract terms (UCT) and recent changes; + which contracts UCT apply to; + examples of UCT; + practical tips; and  + consequences of non-compliance. Following the webinar, there will be a live Q&A. If you cannot make it, you can still register, and we will send you a copy of the recording. You are also eligible to receive a free legal consultation. Lawyers may consider claiming this webinar as an educational CPD activity. Register today: https://lnkd.in/gNxt62J5 #contracts #compliance #inhousecounsel

11

We warmly invite you to join us for our Insolvency Law Series to be held throughout 2024. Session 1: Statutory Demands: More complicated than first meets the eye. Date: Tuesday 28 May 2024 Time: 12:30pm Location: Level 10/114 William Street Melbourne, 3000 with the option to attend via Zoom if you’re unable to make it in person. Host: Senior Associate of our Brisbane office, Anthony Cocolas. The most frequent situation in which a company is wound up is by a creditor relying upon the presumption of insolvency following the expiration of a Statutory Demand.   Statutory Demands are often used by creditors to create pressure on a debtor to pay an amount owing within a short period of time with a dire consequence if they fail to do so.   The legislative scheme governing statutory demands is often overlooked as simple however this view has often led practitioners into common mistakes when dealing with Statutory Demands. A basic understanding of Statutory Demands is critical for those that have their postal address recorded as a client’s registered office, as this is where Statutory Demands are delivered, and inevitably they will be the first point of contact for the client in responding and dealing with the Statutory Demand.    This seminar deals with the key principles of Statutory Demands in an interactive and informative manner. Please see the following link to register your online attendance: https://lnkd.in/gDPcJmUn   Seats are limited, so please RSVP at your earliest to Marketing Coordinator, Charlotte Goulopoulos at cgoulopoulos@slflawyers.com.au.

37

4 Comments

A Mutual Wills Agreement is an agreement between two people to make their Wills in particular terms and to not alter those terms in the future. A Mutual Wills Agreement is generally set out in a separate contract or referenced in the Wills themselves. However, in the recent decision of Re Miglic the Supreme Court of Victoria found a verbal agreement made nearly 30 years prior to death constituted a binding and enforceable Mutual Wills Agreement. Luke Haley https://buff.ly/3RtdNzF #moores #hereforgood #helpinggoodgrow #mutualwillsagreement #estateplanning

12

Under the Rules of Court 2021, a defendant to a civil claim who contends that the Court has no jurisdiction to hear the claim or should not exercise its jurisdiction to do so is permitted to file a Defence or affidavit (as the case may be) stating only grounds of jurisdictional objection. Our Associate Director Tay Jing En details: (i) when and how such a Defence or affidavit should be filed, (ii) follow-up steps that defendants should take and (iii) things that defendants should take care to avoid doing. Read the full article here: https://buff.ly/3Vw6wjM #SingaporeLaw #Jurisdiction #Litigation #ROC2021 #RulesofCourt

17

9 April 2024 Press Release from New Zealand Asian Lawyers   New Zealand Asian Lawyers is pleased to announce the establishment of a panel to assist the New Zealand courts by applying to intervene in cases of wider public interest where Asian parties are concerned.   The panel will recommend that New Zealand Asian Lawyers considers applying for leave to intervene if some or all of the following criteria are met:   1. The case has public policy issues and/or it is of general public importance. This means the outcome of the case is likely to have wider significance to the public (or particular sections of the public) beyond the active parties.    2. Development of the law is likely in the case. This might include a potential change in an established position and/or novel issue which is untested or unresolved by the senior courts. The change could include substantive, procedural or evidential aspects of the law.   3. As an intervener, New Zealand Asian Lawyers can likely improve the quality of the information before the Court. This may be achieved by calling on the special expertise of New Zealand Asian Lawyers members and/or access to information to assist the Court (for example, issues or information relating to culturally and linguistically diverse parties).   4. New Zealand Asian Lawyers and/or its members, and/or its member’s clients are, or are likely to be, directly or indirectly affected by the outcome of the case.   5. New Zealand Asian Lawyers is likely to have a perspective different to those of the parties and which it would assist the court to hear.    6. Where it is requested by any court to do so.   In the first instance, we intend to focus on the senior courts. Our hope is to intervene in at least one case in 2024.   The inaugural members of the panel who will decide which cases to apply to intervene in are Mai Chen (President of New Zealand Asian Lawyers), Yvonne Mortimer-Wang (Britomart Chambers), Augustine Choi (Bankside Chambers), David Liu (Heritage Law), and Arthur Loo (Loo & Koo).   “Many Asian Lawyers have expertise in the law and litigation, as well as understanding the culture and language of the Asian parties. It is vital that we can use this knowledge to provide assistance to the court where the court considers that helpful.”   “We hope the establishment of this panel will lead to a more informed understanding of important issues concerning Asian parties in the public interest.”       Should you have a case that meets these guidelines, or if you are interested in serving on the panel, please get in contact by emailing Mai.Chen@maichen.nz, yvonne@ymw.co.nz, and augustine@augustinechoi.nz.

53

1 Comment

How do you safeguard confidential information / #tradesecrets in a #contract? Feel free to add your views and experiences. #lawyers #Lawstudents #lawyering

1

Have you been made an Executor of a Will? To learn about your responsibilities and the next steps, please call our empathetic team of professionals on (02) 4944 2008.   #LegalAdvice #AugustandClaireLawyers #SydneyLaw #NewcastleLaw #LawyersWeekly #BoutiqueLaw #LegalSolutions #WillsandEstates #LawFirmLife #Executor Tenille Rossi

5

Can an external administrator be remunerated out of funds held in a project trust account (PTA)/Retention Trust Account (RTA) established under the Building Industry Fairness (Security of Payment) Act 2017 (Qld) (BIF Act)? On Tuesday this week, the Queensland Supreme Court delivered a judgment on this point that is of considerable significance to insolvency practitioners who accept appointments to building companies in Queensland. In short, the Court determined that the options/pathway for external administrators to be remunerated out of funds held in a PTA/RTA are/is very limited. Specifically, the Court found: 1. on its proper construction, the BIF Act excludes a trustee from exercising any right of indemnity under equitable principles or the application of the Court’s inherent jurisdiction in equity to provide for remuneration of a trustee; 2. the reference to “trustee” in ss 51C and 51E of the BIF Act (which prohibits a trustee of a PTA/RTA from recovering costs incurred for administering the account) is not confined to the head building contractor and extends to the administrators and liquidators administering the trust; and 3. regardless, the liquidator or administrator would be a creditor of the trustee, and therefore precluded from claiming its remuneration, costs and expenses by s 51A(1) of the BIF Act (which says that funds in a PTA/RTA can’t be used to recover a debt owed to a creditor of the trustee). Separately and otherwise, the Court noted it may be open for an administrator or liquidator to seek remuneration out of funds held in a PTA/RTA on a Universal Distributing/Berkeley Applegate basis, or at least that the BIF Act did not extinguish or prohibit remuneration from being sought in that way. It also held it may be possible to appoint a receiver and manager to administer the PTA/RTA. A timely and important decision following on from the excellent coverage of this issue at the Queensland ARITA Young Professionals Committee panel discussion a few weeks ago, with Chris Cook, Scott Guthrie and Matthew Hudson. Matt has put up a post about this too, which you should read if this topic is of interest to you. There’s a copy of the judgment below, and a link in the comments.

46

10 Comments

Case: Court cautions liquidators to comply with compulsive orders even when they are not funded in a liquidation Guest contributors: Allan Kawalsky RITF, Partner, TurksLegal Timothy Lui, Lawyer, TurksLegal A recent decision in the Supreme Court of New South Wales has warned liquidators and their legal practitioners against inaction in the face of compulsive procedures, emphasising the importance of taking proactive steps even when not funded in a liquidation: Re Bailey Roberts Group Pty Ltd (in liq) [2024] NSWSC 404. Read the takeaways, background and decision (members only) at arita.com.au. https://lnkd.in/gwj33nKt #insolvency #restructuring #turnaround #liquidation #liquidator

29

5 Comments

A Process Server in Australia is a person responsible for delivering legal documents to parties involved in a court case. These documents can include summonses, subpoenas, writs, complaints, or other legal notices. The process server ensures that individuals involved in legal proceedings are properly notified and given the opportunity to respond. Process servers are critical in the legal system because they help maintain due process by providing formal notification in a way that can be verified. This verification usually involves the process server providing a proof of service or an affidavit of service, indicating when, where, and how the document was delivered, and who received it. In Australia, process servers might work for law firms, government agencies, or private companies specializing in serving legal documents. They are expected to follow specific rules and regulations to ensure that service is carried out legally and effectively. Different jurisdictions in Australia may have variations in rules for serving legal documents, such as methods of service and timing requirements. Contact us to find out how we can assist you with serving court documents. 📄 #lawyer #processserver #privateinvestigator

2

🖥 The Supreme Court of Victoria has released new guidelines on the use of AI in Court proceedings, with a focus on transparency and responsibility. These guidelines are crucial for all legal professionals and parties involved in Court proceedings. For more information, you can find the full guidelines here: ➡️ https://bit.ly/3XfRC3R #SvensonBarristers #BarristersList #LegalTech #EthicalAI #AI #AusLaw #SupremeCourtOfVictoria

20

Transitioning to Collaborative Law: A New Era of Resolution 💡 Given the court backlog and the recent changes to the Family Procedure Rules (FPR) on 29th April 2024, emphasising non-court dispute resolution, including collaborative law, is especially timely. What is collaborative law? 🤔 The collaborative model involves parties contracting with their lawyers (and each other) to abstain from contested court proceedings throughout the duration of their retainer. Building upon the "no court" foundation, the couple can then bring in other professionals to facilitate higher-level and more open dialogue. This approach enables them to explore how the family's needs can be met and how a fair settlement and arrangements can be achieved. The key benefits for couples in adopting the collaborative law approach include the possibility of counselling input, planning around children's needs and the option to involve financial professionals to work out future finances. Many families are often presented with the traditional approach of relying solely on legal advice that ultimately leads to court proceedings. However, if the family law community could adopt a collaborative approach from the outset, we could significantly benefit both the parties involved and the Family Court system. Based on our experience, the crucial process of full and frank disclosure in divorce proceedings can typically be achieved voluntarily and outside of court, albeit with the understanding that court intervention may occur if disclosure is incomplete or unclear. Lawyers play a pivotal role in providing a framework around this disclosure to predict the likely financial outcomes. Collaborative practice empowers lawyers to concentrate on the essential elements of their role, which add genuine value to clients—the ability to anticipate and frame potential outcomes. The ultimate goal of divorce can be achieved in more constructive and cost-effective ways compared to traditional adversarial processes. The recent Part 3 reforms to the Family Procedure Rules (FPR) aim to raise the threshold for accessing court as the default option. In summary, these reforms: - Limit the exceptions for bypassing the requirement for attending a Mediation Information and Assessment Meeting (MIAM) in most private family cases; - Impose obligations on the court to scrutinise compliance with procedural rules and ensure that opportunities for settlement outside of court have been explored; and - Mandate parties to keep the court informed by submitting open statements detailing their position and efforts to engage in non-court dispute resolution processes. These reforms empower couples who are shaping their future post-divorce, placing decision-making authority back in their hands—a future that we help navigate through our work. Please refer to the following FPR link below for detailed information on the recent changes. #familylaw #FPR #court #lawyers #familyprocedureres #collaborative #fiances

7