Default, deadlock and remedies

The primary purpose of this chapter is to examine the effectiveness of common default provisions and the range of common law and equitable remedies available to a joint venture partner in the event of default by a co-venturer. Because of the various joint venture vehicles such as trusts, corporations, partnerships and others, it is proposed to deal only generally with these questions.

The appropriateness of default investment options in defined contribution plans : Australian evidence

For participants in defined contribution (DC) plans who refrain from exercising investment choice, plan contributions are invested following the default investment option of their respective plans. Since default investment options of different plans vary widely in terms of their benchmark asset allocation, the most important determinant of investment performance, participants enrolled in these options face significantly different wealth outcomes at retirement. This paper simulates the terminal wealth outcomes under different static asset allocation strategies to evaluate their relative appeal as default investment choice in DC plans. We find that strategies with low or moderate allocation to stocks are consistently outperformed in terms of upside potential of exceeding the participant’s wealth accumulation target at retirement as well as downside risk of falling below that target outcome by aggressive strategies whose allocation to stocks approach 100%. The risk of extremely adverse wealth outcomes for plan participants also does not appear to be very sensitive to asset allocation. Our evidence suggests the appropriateness of strategies heavily tilted towards stocks to be nominated as default investment options in DC plans unless plan providers emphasize predictability of wealth outcomes over adequacy of retirement wealth.

Don’t judge a superannuation default investment option by its name

With the massive decline in savings arising from the Global Financial Crisis (GFC), it is timely to review superannuation fund investment and disclosure strategies in the lead-up to the crisis. Accordingly, this study examines differences among superannuation funds’ default investment options in terms of naming and framing over three years from 2005 to 2007, as presented in product disclosure statements (PDSs). The findings indicate that default options are becoming more alike regardless of their name, and consequently, members may face increasing difficulties in distinguishing between balanced and growth-named default options when comparing them across superannuation funds. Comparability is also likely to be constrained by variations in the framing of default options presented in investment option menus in PDSs. These findings highlight the need for standardisation of default option definitions and disclosures to ensure descriptive accuracy, transparency and comparability.

Reaction to the mandatory write-down provisions of AASB 1010 : accounting for the revaluation of non-current assets

Commentators in the financial press claimed that the amendments to AASB 1010, Accounting for the Revaluation of Non-Current Assets, issued in September 1991, would have “disastrous” implications for the accounts of companies. This paper is concerned with whether the amendments did indeed affect asset write-down activities. An analysis of write-down practices of 75 Australian companies before and after the amendments were operative suggests that the commentators' judgment could have been hasty.

Obligatory dangerousness criteria in the involuntary commitment and treatment provisions of Australian mental health legislation

Abstract Objective Involuntary commitment and treatment (IC&T) of people affected by mental illness may have reference to considerations of dangerousness and/or need for care. While attempts have been made to classify mental health legislation according to whether IC&T has obligatory dangerousness criteria, there is no standardised procedure for making classification decisions. The aim of this study was to develop and trial a classification procedure and apply it to Australia's mental health legislation. Method We developed benchmarks for ‘need for care’ and ‘dangerousness’ and applied these benchmarks to classify the mental health legislation of Australia's 8 states and territories. Our focus was on civil commitment legislation rather than criminal commitment legislation. Results One state changed its legislation during the course of the study resulting in two classificatory exercises. In our initial classification, we were able to classify IC&T provisions in legislation from 6 of the 8 jurisdictions as being based on either ‘need for care’ or ‘dangerousness’. Two jurisdictions used a terminology that was outside the established benchmarks. In our second classification, we were also able to successfully classify IC&T provisions in 6 of the 8 jurisdictions. Of the 6 Acts that could be classified, all based IC&T on ‘need for care’ and none contained mandatory ‘dangerousness’ criteria. Conclusions The classification system developed for this study provided a transparent and probably reliable means of classifying 75% of Australia's mental health legislation. The inherent ambiguity of the terminology used in two jurisdictions means that further development of classification may not be possible until the meaning of the terms used has been addressed in case law. With respect to the 6 jurisdictions for which classification was possible, the findings suggest that Australia's mental health legislation relies on ‘need for care’ and not on ‘dangerousness’ as the guiding principle for IC&T. Keywords: Involuntary commitment; Mental health legislation; Dangerousness; Australia

Redland city youth and public space report : provisions for good practice

Written for Redland City Council in collaboration with the Capalaba Stakeholders Group. The provisions detailed in this report constitute a protocol agreement developed through the Capalaba Stakeholders Group between 2009 and 2011 around young people and public spaces in Redland City, Queensland. These provisions include agreed principles, standards and responses to tensions or unacceptable behaviour, how various tensions and problems can be resolved in constructive ways and how people, including young people can work together to make a public or community accessed space safe and accessible. It is based on the recognition that young people are part of the community and that strategies to resolve tensions that arise should be inclusive and employ a mixed methods approach.

Default judgment set aside without costs

A recent District Court case is believed to be the first in Queensland in which UCPR r 5 has been used to support the setting aside of a regularly entered default judgment without a costs order.

Setting aside default judgment - whether judgment regularly or irregularly entered - service under Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s109X(1) - requirements for affadavit of service

In Hill v Robertson Suspension Systems Pty Ltd [2009] QDC 165 McGill DCJ considered the procedural requirements for the service of originating process on a company, and for proving that service for the purpose of obtaining default judgment.The judge’s views adopt a strict and technical construction of the requirements for an affidavit of service under r 120(1)(b). Though clearly obiter, they may well affect the approach taken on applications to enter or set aside default judgments in the lower courts. Pending further judicial consideration of the issue, it is suggested the prudent course is to ensure that the deponent of an affidavit for service effected under s 109X(1)(a) of the Act deposes not only to the location of the registered office of the company but also, at a minimum, provides the source of that information.

The Australian corporate rescue provisions : how do they compare?

A notable feature of corporate legislative development in western countries for the past 30 years is the various mechanisms introduced to facilitate the survival of company structures facing insolvency. Australia’s corporate rescue version, called a “voluntary administration”, is now contained in Part 5.3A of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), although first introduced in 1993. The Australian provisions apply to all corporate entities and commence with a short moratorium followed by a meeting of creditors. At the creditors’ meeting a “rescue” plan called a deed of company arrangement may be entered into, or, alternatively the company may be liquidated. The voluntary administration provisions have become a significant part of Australia’s corporate insolvency landscape and are critical to the operation of corporate law outside of insolvency. Australia does not have a specialist bankruptcy court, rather it utilises the English approach where insolvency practitioners are accountants and appointed to the insolvent company as administrators. In Australia, insolvency practitioners must be registered with the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (“ASIC”), the corporate and securities regulator. A voluntary administration is usually commenced by the board of directors appointing an insolvency practitioner to the company. There exists no opportunity for a voluntary administration to commence at the creditors’ or court’s behest. This chapter seeks to address the comparative necessity of Australia’s corporate regime.