• Privacy Compliance Checklist – Does Your Company Comply?

    privacy compliance

    Does your organisation have a privacy compliance programme? 2018 has seen a significant escalation in privacy and data protection regulations both in Australia and internationally. These new compliance obligations can be tricky to navigate, but businesses need to ensure they are in line with current privacy laws.

    Read More >

  • Unfair Contract Terms for Small Businesses Tested in Court

    unfair contract terms

    Since the Australian Consumer Law was amended to include protections for small businesses from unfair contract terms in November 2016, the Australian business community has eagerly awaited the testing of the new regime.

    In Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v JJ Richards & Sons Pty Ltd [2017] FCA 1224 the ACCC contended that a number of terms in a standard form contract were “unfair” with regards s 24 of the ACL.

    Read More >

  • Improper Conduct Results in Court Awarding Indemnity Costs

    indemnity costs

    In a recent case the Supreme Court of Victoria considered orders for indemnity costs following a debacle concerning a property settlement.

    Read More >

  • Competing Equities Dispute: What Determines Priority?

    competing equities

    The recent WA Supreme Court case of Bunnings v Hanson Construction [2017] considers a competing equities dispute between two suppliers.

    The decision serves as an important reminder for businesses who supply goods or services on credit to be aware of the factors courts take into account in determining priorities between equitable interests should the debtor’s assets be insufficient to cover the debts of all creditors.

    Read More >

  • Short Term Loan Transaction Fails: Is Borrower Liable?

    short term loan transaction

    Lender fails in attempt to have fees paid due to a short term loan transaction not proceeding. The Supreme Court of NSW dismissed the lender’s claim of fees and expenses.

    In Interim Finance v Bright Beginnings Learning Centre Glendenning [2018] the Court found the lender did not have a caveatable interest in the security property. Further, the Court ordered the removal of the caveat registered over the property.

    Read More >

  • Removal of Caveats: Application Dismissed

    In a recent ruling, the Supreme Court of Queensland dismissed an application for the removal of caveats over a number of properties.

    In DT & MF Holdings v Ascendia Accountants [2017], the Applicants needed to establish that there existed no serious question to be tried. All attempts to do this failed.

    Read More >

  • Assignment of Mortgage & Loan Agreement in Dispute

    The issue of an Assignment of Mortgage came under dispute in a recent Supreme Court of Western Australia ruling. Was the transfer of loans to a third party valid?

    In La Trobe v MDVest [2017], the borrowers disputed three prior judgments in favour of the lender. They contended that the lender was not entitled to judgment in each action. The borrowers presented a number of reasons for resisting judgment, including the issue of Assignment.

    Read More >

  • Mortgagee Possession Increasingly Hindered by Mortgagors

    mortgagee possession

    In ordinary mortgagee possession cases the problem of mortgagors re-entering the property and being a hindrance, is on the rise. What is the way forward?

    A recent Supreme Court of Victoria ruling considers how to restrain a mortgagor from another re-entry of property under possession of the mortgagee. Does the Court have power to issue a restraining order?

    Read More >

  • Lender’s Mortgage Insurance: Who Does it Protect?

    What exactly is lender’s mortgage insurance (LMI) and whose interests does it protect?

    According to a report released by two of Australia’s largest mortgage insurance providers, about 70% of borrowers believe LMI protects them in the event of a default. This is not correct. LMI is an insurance designed to protect the lender.

    Read More >

  • Lender Seeks to Enforce Equitable Charges and Wins

    Equitable charges came under the spotlight in a recent NSW Supreme Court ruling. In Morris Finance Ltd v Free [2017] NSWSC the Court analysed the wording of a lease agreement. Did it contain language necessary to create an equitable charge?

    The Lender looked to enforce the charge by seeking orders for judicial sale of property and ancillary orders for possession.

    Read More >

Solutions. Not just advice