Litigation

Order for Security for Costs

An Order for security for costs is to help ensure that unsuccessful proceedings commenced by a Plaintiff do not disadvantage the Defendant. Such applications are more usually made in relation to an appeal rather than an original matter.

A security for costs order generally requires a Plaintiff to pay a certain amount of money into Court (or a solicitor’s trust account) before their proceedings can continue – that is the proceedings are in effect stayed pending the security being provided.

The Court has several sources of power to make an order for security for costs, including:

  • the Court’s inherent power to stay proceedings to ensure the proper and effective administration of justice
  • the relevant Court rules (eg, Rule 42.21 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005);
  • s.1335 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).

Due to the weight an order for security for costs may carry, Courts must weigh the rights and interests of all parties to the proceedings. The Court has a broad discretion as to whether to grant such an order and will usually look to factors including (in no specific order):

  • the inherent legal right of a Plaintiff to bring legal proceedings;
  • the strengths and bona fides of the Plaintiff’s case
  • where the Plaintiff ordinarily is resident;
  • the financial standing and asset position of the Plaintiff in the jurisdiction in which the claim has been commenced (including where the Plaintiff may have divested itself of assets);
  • whether there is reason to believe that the Plaintiff can satisfy an order for costs not only from its own resources, but from other resources including those who will benefit from the litigation; the public importance of the case;
  • delay of bringing the application for the order;
  • if the Plaintiff hasn’t disclosed an address or has moved and not updated it, particularly if there is reason to believe that it was done to to avoid the consequences of the proceedings;
  • whether such an order will frustrate the litigation;
  • the justice of the case.

It is uncommon for such an order to be made against an individual Plaintiff (as opposed to a company, partnership or trustee) but not impossible, depending in the circumstances of the particular case and Plaintiff.

FURTHER INFORMATION

For further information, please contact McKillop Legal on (02) 9521 2455 or email help@mckilloplegal.com.au 

This information is general only and is not a substitute for proper legal advice. Please contact McKillop Legal to discuss your needs.

in Asset Protection / Business / Commercial Law / Debt Recovery / Dispute Resolution / General / Insolvency & Bankruptcy / Litigation / Risk management  by 01 Apr 2025 0 comments

Family provision orders

Under the Succession Act 2006 (NSW), eligible persons may apply to the Supreme Court of New South Wales for a family provision order in relation to the estate or notional* estate of a deceased person to provide “for their maintenance, education or advancement in life”.

The first hurdle to overcome is being an “eligible person” and the second is whether the provision (if any) made for the applicant in the deceased’s Will** is adequate, and if not, what “family provision order” could be made to make it adequate. Unfortunately, this process is not as simple as we have explained it.

Limitation period

Claims for provision must be made within 12 months of the date of death of the deceased person (although in limited circumstanced, this time limit can be extended).

Process

After proceedings are commenced and the parties have put on the majority of their evidence, applications for family provision orders are generally referred to either a Court annexed mediation or to private mediation but if no agreement can be reached, the matter will be set down for hearing.

Eligibility

Those who are “eligible” to make a claim for a family provision order out of a deceased person’s estate include:

  • a spouse of the deceased at the time of the deceased’s death;
  • a former spouse of the deceased;
  • a person in a de facto relationship with the deceased at the time of death
  • children (including adopted children) of the deceased;
  • someone with whom the deceased was in a close personal relationship*** with at the time of their death;
  • those who have, at any time, been wholly or partly dependent upon the deceased and who either:
    • are a grandchild of the deceased; or
    • were, at any time, member of a household of which the deceased a member.

How do you know if you are to receive an inheritance?

Click here to read about how to get a copy of a deceased person’s will.

Adequacy

The Court won’t simply rewrite a deceased person’s Will based on claims of justice or unfairness such as unequally dividing an estate between siblings. The Court has a wide discretion in determining these matters and the nature of any order for provision that may be made.

The Court first considers if the gift (if any) was adequate and if not, what provision may be adequate.

The Court exercises is discretion to make an order and if so, on what terms, after considering the following factors:

  1. any family or other relationship between the applicant and the deceased, including the nature and duration of the relationship,
  2. the nature and extent of any obligations or responsibilities owed by the deceased to the applicant, to any other person in respect of whom an application has been made for a family provision order or to any beneficiary of the deceased’s estate,
  3. the nature and extent of the deceased’s estate (including any property that is, or could be, designated as notional estate* of the deceased person) and of any liabilities or charges to which the estate is subject, as in existence when the application is being considered,
  4. the financial resources (including earning capacity) and financial needs, both present and future, of the applicant, of any other person in respect of whom an application has been made for a family provision order or of any beneficiary of the deceased person’s estate (that is the competing needs/claims of others),
  5. if the applicant is cohabiting with another person–the financial circumstances of the other person,
  6. any physical, intellectual or mental disability of the applicant, any other person in respect of whom an application has been made for a family provision order or any beneficiary of the deceased’s estate that is in existence when the application is being considered or that may reasonably be anticipated,
  7. the age of the applicant when the application is being considered,
  8. any contribution (whether financial or otherwise) by the applicant to the acquisition, conservation and improvement of the estate of the deceased person or to the welfare of the deceased or the deceased’s family, whether made before or after the deceased’s death, for which adequate consideration (not including any pension or other benefit) was not received, by the applicant,
  9. any provision made for the applicant by the deceased, either during the deceased’s life or made from the deceased’s estate,
  10. any evidence of the testamentary intentions of the deceased, including evidence of statements made by the deceased,
  11. whether the applicant was being maintained, either wholly or partly, by the deceased before the deceased’s death and, if the Court considers it relevant, the extent to which and the basis on which the deceased did so,
  12. whether any other person is liable to support the applicant,
  13. the character and conduct of the applicant before and after the date of the deceased’s death,
  14. the conduct of any other person before and after the date of the deceased’s death,
  15. any relevant Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander customary law,
  16. any other matter the Court considers relevant, including matters in existence at the time of the deceased’s death or at the time the application is being considered.

*Where assets that were previously assets of the deceased prior to death (such as assets gifted or transferred by the deceased to another person or entity prior to death to attempt to avoid an application for an order for provision, superannuation, property owned as joint tenants between the deceased and another person), be considered as an asset of the estate for the purposes of an application for a family provision order.

**Note that even in intestacy (where there is no Will), an application can be made for a family provision order.

*** A “close personal relationship” is a relationship other than a marriage or a de facto relationship between two adult persons, whether or not related by family, who are living together, one or each of whom provides the other with domestic support and personal care but not for reward or on behalf of another person or organization.

FURTHER INFORMATION

For further information in relation to Wills, Probate, Intestacy, Estate Planning or even International Wills, please contact McKillop Legal on (02) 9521 2455 or email help@mckilloplegal.com.au 

This information is general only and is not a substitute for proper legal advice. Please contact McKillop Legal to discuss your needs.

Stay up to date – LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram

in Dispute Resolution / Estate Planning / General / Litigation / Probate / Property  by 01 Jul 2021 0 comments

What does “Without Prejudice” mean?

Have you ever received a letter or email with the words “without prejudice” or “without prejudice except as to costs” on it? Perhaps your lawyer has sent one on your behalf? Do you even know what it means?

It is advantageous for parties to try to resolve that dispute prior to incurring the significant costs and taking on the substantial risks that are involved with litigation. In having those settlement discussions or in making offers of settlement, parties may be disinclined to make admissions or concessions for fear that they may be used against them by the other party. This is where the concept of “without prejudice’ helps.

“Without prejudice” is a common law concept (now covered by statute since the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) (the Act) was enacted) that communications marked as being “without prejudice” cannot be used by the other party as evidence in Court. This means that parties can speak openly about the matters in dispute without the risk of the other party using that offer against them later.

If you do want to be able to use the communications, you would not mark them as being “without prejudice” – you would want them to remain “open”.

So why the “except as to costs” or “save as to costs” part? Well, the privilege afforded by s131 of the Act that the communications cannot be placed into evidence does not apply to when the Court has to determine who is responsible for the costs of the litigation (ie, after the dispute has been resolved or determined by the court when entering a judgment).

In addition to these “without prejudice” communications, the various Courts have their own rules that provide for formal Offers of Compromise and the like and that govern the effect of not accepting an offer that you otherwise ought to have (the idea being to seek to have the parties really turn their mind to settling, and not wasting their own, the other party’s and the Court’s time and resources).

Ordinarily in litigation, the rule is that the losing party pays the winning party’s costs. The rules operate to change that where formal offers have been made and not accepted.

As an overly simple scenario by way of example, if an offer was made by Party A that Party B did not accept and at the hearing, Party A received a judgment for an amount equal to better than their offer, Party B can be penalized in the form of a costs order for the failure to accept that offer.

FURTHER INFORMATION

Craig Pryor is principal solicitor at McKillop Legal.

For further information in relation to any legal dispute or litigation matter, contact Craig Pryor on (02) 9521 2455 or email craig@mckilloplegal.com.au

This information is general only and is not a substitute for proper legal advice.  Please contact McKillop Legal to discuss your needs.

Stay up to date – LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter

in Business / Commercial Law / Dispute Resolution / General / Litigation / Risk management  by 01 Dec 2019 0 comments

What is client legal privilege?

Client legal privilege, also known as “legal professional privilege” is a fundamental common law concept now covered by the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) (the Act) that protects the confidentiality of certain confidential communications made between a lawyer and the lawyer’s client.

The rationale for the privilege was to enhance the administration of justice and the proper conduct of litigation by promoting candid and honest disclosure between clients and their lawyers to enable lawyers to give proper advice and representation to their clients. We live in a complex society and our laws and legal system are at times very complicated so obtaining advice is to be encouraged.

Client legal privilege applies to confidential lawyer/client communications or even confidential communications between 2 or more lawyers acting for the client (whether oral or in writing and whether prepared by the lawyer or the client) where the dominant purpose of the communication is:

  • seeking or providing legal advice (“advice privilege” – s.118 of the Act); or
  • in relation to existing or anticipated legal proceedings (“litigation privilege” – s.119 of the Act)

The communication must have been made confidentially to attract privilege. Where a communication is made in front of a third party, privilege will likely not apply.

Privilege can attach to communications between an in-house lawyer and their employer, provided that the communication is made in confidence and the lawyer is acting in their professional capacity.

It is called “client legal privilege” because the privilege belongs to the client and not the client’s lawyer. A lawyer may only disclose privileged communications if clearly instructed to do so by a client.

How is the privilege waived or lost?

Client legal privilege may be waived by doing some act inconsistent with the confidentiality that the privilege is intended to protect, such as

  • knowingly and voluntarily disclosing the substance of the evidence to another person; or
  • the substance of the evidence has been disclosed with the express or implied consent of the client.

The litigation arm of the privilege can also attach to third parties such as experts however, where a party seeks to rely on an expert report in litigation, this will waive privilege over the instructions given and the documents referred to or relied upon within the expert’s report.

Privilege does not apply to communications made for the purpose of facilitating illegal or improper purposes. There are also some statutory exclusions to client legal privilege such as in relation to the investigative and regulatory powers of some Commonwealth agencies.

FURTHER INFORMATION

Craig Pryor is principal solicitor at McKillop Legal.

For further information in relation to any legal dispute, litigation matter or any business or commercial law matter, contact Craig Pryor on (02) 9521 2455 or email craig@mckilloplegal.com.au

This information is general only and is not a substitute for proper legal advice.  Please contact McKillop Legal to discuss your needs.

Stay up to date – LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter

in Business / Commercial Law / Dispute Resolution / General / Litigation  by 01 Nov 2019 0 comments

Forcing the sale of land in NSW

Where land is owned by multiple people (whether as joint tenants or tenants in common), any one of the owners can approach the Supreme Court to seek an order for the appointment of a trustee for sale and for the property to be sold.

Ordinarily, the owners can come to agreement on the need for a sale and the basis on which it is to be conducted. For example, following some negotiations or a mediation, the co-owners may agree to:

  • sale by auction with an agreed reserve price;
  • sale by public treaty with an agreed price; or
  • sale by one owner to another, with agreement on how the price is determined (such as agreeing on a valuer or methodology).

When co-owners are in a dispute however as to whether a property should be sold, when and on what terms, the provisions of section 66G of the Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW) can be utilized to force the sale of the property, even where the other owner (or owners) do not want to sell it.

Once appointed, the trustee has the legal power to sell the property on the best terms available and to engage real estate agents, valuers and lawyers/conveyancers as may be required. So as to help ensure that the property sells for fair market value and to avoid any breach of trust allegations from any of the owners for not obtaining the best price possible, it is sensible for a trustee to sell at public auction

A usual order made is that the unsuccessful party (usually the defendant/respondent) pays the plaintiff /applicant’s legal costs. The costs risk arising from litigation (which can be substantial in amount) is usually a key factor in out of court settlements being made.

Applications for the appointment of a statutory trustee for sale are generally only refused in special circumstances, such as where the is a prior agreement not to sell, around the terms of any sale or to sell only when certain conditions are met (which is why any co-ownership agreements ought to be in writing as verbal evidence can be less persuasive).

Usually, after a successful application is made and the property is sold, the proceeds of sale after payment of:

  • any encumbrances (such as mortgages and unregistered mortgages secured by caveats);
  • the costs of sale (real estate agent and auctioneer fees and marketing costs etc); and
  • the trustee’s costs

are held on trust by the appointed trustee and then distributed proportionally according to ownership.

FURTHER INFORMATION

Craig Pryor is principal solicitor at McKillop Legal. For further information in relation to family disagreements in relation to land or estates or any business or commercial dispute, contact Craig Pryor on (02) 9521 2455 or email craig@mckilloplegal.com.au.

This information is general only and is not a substitute for proper legal advice. Please contact McKillop Legal to discuss your legal needs.

Stay up to date – LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter

in Business / Commercial Law / Dispute Resolution / General / Property / Trusts  by 01 Oct 2018 0 comments

Deceased estate litigation

Succession Act claims

We are often called upon to advise clients in relation to claims on estates in relation to such things as challenging the validity of the Will (such as due to lack of mental capacity when the deceased person made the will or duress) or what is known as a Succession Act claim or a family provision claim (where a person says that adequate provision was not made for them in a Will). We discuss the latter here.

The purpose of the Succession Act is to seek to ensure that “adequate” provision is provided from a deceased’s estate to the family members of a deceased person (and others). Claims under the Act are based on needs.

Important facts

  • Claims must be made within 12 months of the date of death of the deceased (although in limited circumstanced, this time limit can be extended).
  • To make a claim, you must first establish that you are an “eligible person”.
  • Assuming you are an “eligible person”, you must demonstrate needs beyond the provision that was made for you in the Will (if any) for your proper maintenance, education or advancement in life.
Who is an eligible person?

Those who are eligible to make a claim for a provision out of deceased estate include:
  • A spouse of the deceased at the time of the deceased’s death;
  • A person in a de facto relationship with the deceased at the time of death
  • Children (including adopted children) of the deceased;
  • Former spouses of the deceased;
  • Someone with whom the deceased was in a close personal relationship* at the time of their death;
  • Those who have, at any time, been wholly or partly dependent upon the deceased:

– were either a grandchild of the deceased; or

– were, at any time, member of a household of which the deceased a member.

* A “close personal relationship” is a relationship other than a marriage or a de facto relationship between two adult persons, whether or not related by family, who are living together, one or each of whom provides the other with domestic support and personal care but not for reward or on behalf of another person or organisation.

What is involved?

To make a claim, the proceedings are usually commenced in the Supreme Court by way of Summons and evidence will be required in an affidavit setting out the nature and history of the relationship, contributions made to the deceased’s property and wellbeing, details of your financial need and any other relevant factors.

Simply having financial needs and showing some level of dependence on the deceased is not the end of it. The Court will have to weigh up many other factors, such as the size of the estate, the deceased’s wishes (such as those stated in a statement of testamentary intention or other similar document), competing claims from others, circumstances and events that may tend to dis-entitle a person from a benefit and so on.

Time and costs involved

Litigation is a lengthy and time-consuming process and it is an emotional one with family relationships being strained by what may be contained in affidavits or said in the witness box at a hearing. That said, often the estate pays the costs (or a large proportion of them) involved in such cases so it may not be a financial burden to enforce your rights.

Most cases settle prior hearing and usually at a mediation that can be arranged by the Court or by private agreement between the parties. Settlement is often advised to avoid the risks, costs (and emotional cost) of litigation and to help preserve any family relationships.

Often we act for the executors of an estate, but we also act for beneficiaries and those that are not mentioned in Wills at all.
Further information

If you would like any more information in relation to Wills, deceased estate litigation or estate planning/business succession issues generally, please contact Craig Pryor on (02) 9521 2455 or email craig@mckilloplegal.com.au
in Dispute Resolution / Estate Planning / General / Litigation / Probate / Trusts  by 15 Feb 2017 0 comments

Have you just been served?

COURT PAPERS JUST DELIVERED TO YOUR OFFICE?

If you have received a Statement of Claim, Summons, Originating Process or Writ, be aware that you must act very quickly.

Replying to the person, entity or firm that issued the Court/Tribunal papers is not enough. Formal steps to file an Appearance, Defence, Notice of Intention to Defend or Reply must be taken within the relevant time.

The proper form of response varies depending on which court and in which jurisdiction the proceedings have been commenced as they each have different Rules and Regulations that apply.

Generally, a Defendant, Respondent etc will have only 28 days or such other period as may be specified in the document in which to file the appropriate response. Failure to do so in time or at all will leave the recipient open to summary or default judgment (automatic judgment against you without a hearing).

Failure to file and serve the appropriate document in response in time can have dire consequences.

A judgment can affect credit ratings, the ability to seek finance in the future and is a precursor to enforcement actions such as bankruptcy litigation, liquidation and winding up of companies, garnishee orders, writs of possession, visits from the Sheriff, notices for examination etc!

Default judgments can often be set aside, but this comes at a cost and immediately puts you on the back foot. In litigation, it is best to stay ahead of the game and be pro-active.

Most court documents are required to be served personally however, companies can be served by post at their registered office. Documents commencing proceedings for small claims (claims under $10,000) can be served by post by the court.

If a court document is served, steps should be taken to immediately seek advice from (rather than leaving it to the last few days).

McKillop Legal can assist in various ways such as:

  • seeking more details of the claim from the lawyers for the party commencing the claim,
  • filing and serving the appropriate document to prevent default judgment,
  • advising on the claim and its prospects of success,
  • filing any defence document
  • preparing your evidence,
  • attempting to resolve the matter prior to any hearing, and/or
  • if necessary, running the hearing with a barrister.

FURTHER INFORMATION

Craig Pryor is principal solicitor at McKillop Legal. For further information in relation to litigation and dispute resolution or any commercial law matter, contact Craig Pryor on (02) 9521 2455 or email craig@mckilloplegal.com.au.

in Business / Commercial Law / Dispute Resolution / Litigation  by 22 Aug 2016 0 comments

Do you have customers that owe you money?

WHAT OPTIONS ARE THERE TO CHASE DEBTS?

Where a customer has not complied with the terms on which goods or services have been provided by a business, in that they have failed to make payment as and when required and despite repeated requests, it can often be of assistance for a demand letter to be sent by a lawyer.

The letter of demand will usually require payment in full by a defined time or may propose a payment plan with payment by instalments.

McKillop Legal is often called upon to advise in relation to debt recovery issues. We find that a strongly worded demand, clearly setting out the situation and seeking payment within a reasonable period usually results in payment.

There are various options available for business owners to recover moneys due.

If a letter of demand does not result in payment, there are various options available.

Where the debt is due by a company and the debt is more than $4,000 (this statutory minimum was $2,000 at the time of first publishing this article but changed during COVID and has increased for demands served on or after 01 July 2021) and it has not been disputed, a Creditor’s Statutory Demand can be issued under the Corporations Act giving the company 21 days to either pay the debt or to come to an arrangement to you for payment of the debt, failing which the company is presumed at law to be insolvent and can be wound up on application to the Supreme Court.

If an individual or partnership owes the debt, a company owes the debt but it is less than the above statutory minimum or if a company debtor genuinely disputes the debt, then usually the commencement of proceedings will be necessary (and you would need to weigh up the costs and benefits of doing so to make a commercially sensible decision).

If the debt is at least $10,000 and the debt is the subject of a judgment of a court, you can issue a Bankruptcy Notice. A Bankruptcy Notice provides for payment of the debt or a satisfactory arrangement for payment of the debt to be made within 21 days, failing which an “act of bankruptcy” has been committed, entitling you to commence proceedings in for a bankruptcy/sequestration order.

Options for enforcement of judgments also include:

  • Garnishee orders
  • Writ of Execution over property – where the Sheriff sells personal property, land etc
  • Instalment orders

FURTHER INFORMATION

For further information in relation to business succession, estate planning, litigation and dispute resolution or any commercial law matter, contact us on (02) 9521 2455 or email help@mckilloplegal.com.au

 

in Business / Debt Recovery / Dispute Resolution  by 14 Aug 2016 0 comments