Codes of Practice for laworld members

1. Publicity and ethics

1.1 Members shall avoid adverse publicity, both for LAWorld, other member firms and their own law firms.

1.2 Members shall impose the obligations from article 1.1 upon those they employ or hire.

1.3 Members shall only seek publicity when this is in accordance with the wishes, the interest of their clients and in conformity with the rules of their national law society.

1.4 Members shall abide with the laws and codes of their national law society.

1.5 Members shall endeavour to represent and refer only clients of good standing.

2. Business referral procedures

2.1 On receipt of a business referral, acknowledgement will be given within three working days.

2.2 Referral work must always be the subject of an engagement letter to be issued by the member firm to whom the work is referred. The following items must be included in the engagement letter or in a covering letter sent with the engagement letter:

(a) a description of the work to be undertaken.

(b) nature of independent contractual relationship and responsibilities.

(d) a statement indicating the professional indemnity insurance which is required in the jurisdiction, and the amount which is actually held by the firm.

(e) the name of the partner responsible for carrying out the work together with details of staff assigned.

(f) the hourly charge-out rates applicable. Copies of engagement letters must be made available to referring firms upon request.

2.3 A partner must always be responsible for satisfactory completion of the work referred by another member.

2.4 No member shall conduct business in the name of LAWorld but only in the name of their own independent firm.

2.5 Members shall not refer work where they foresee that the client will not be able to settle the fees. Settlement of the fees, however, is the responsibility of the member to whom the work is referred. Members to whom work is referred will generally ask for an advance payment and the referring law firm will inform the client accordingly.

2.6 Members shall not accept referrals for which they do not have the necessary expertise. In that case they will recommend another law firm that has the required expertise.

2.7 After having received all the necessary information, members will give their first opinion as to the referred case, to the client within 10 working days.

2.8 The referring and the referred law firm will agree the manner, form and extent to which information is communicated either directly or indirectly with the client.

LAWorld News

Specificity in Statutory Demands - Australia

For many creditors, issuing a creditor’s statutory demand pursuant to section 459E of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (the Act) against a debtor company is now commonplace. 

However, creditors cannot afford to be nonchalant about their use and preparation of statutory demands, as a failure to prepare properly may result in the demand being set aside. In particular, creditors must ensure that the debt, the subject of the demand, is articulated clearly. 

In many instances, the nature of the debt may be simple, and creditors will easily fulfil their obligations of clarity. However, creditors with more complex factual scenarios may not enjoy the same effortless approach. 

The Principles 

The threshold for sufficiency of description is expressed well in LSI Australia v LSI Holdings; LSI Australia v LSI Consulting [2007] NSWSC 1406, where Austin J held that the description of the debt: (a) must allow a reasonable person, in the shoes of a director of the debtor company, 

(b) to identify the general nature of the debt to a sufficient degree; such that 

(c) the director can assess whether there is a genuine dispute as to the debt (including an offsetting claim) or a defect in the demand. 

The Court’s Approach 

Robb J in the Supreme Court of NSW case In the matter of Oakdale Queensland Pty Limited; In the matter of HLHG Pty Limited; In the matter of ABN 163 546 852 Pty Ltd; In the matter of ABN 163 772 601 Pty Ltd [2014] NSWSC 1958 (Oakdale) considered the Deputy Commissioner of Taxation’s description of a debt, articulated essentially as an RBA deficit and being, in substance, a compilation of various debts, incurred for various reasons, statutorily bundled together and described as a single debt. 

Whilst in Oakdale his Honour ultimately found that the description of debt was sufficient in the circumstances, a word of warning was issued to those, including the Deputy Commissioner, who might fail to specify debts adequately in statutory demands. 

Of more recent history are the scathing comments of Wigney J, who described a demand with a ‘fairly generic description’ as being ‘vague and ambiguous and therefore defective…deficient…and potentially misleading’ (Wollongong Coal Limited v Gujarat NRE India Pty Ltd [2015] FCA 221). In that case, the demand was set aside with the petitioning creditor (defendant) ordered to pay the costs of the demand recipient (plaintiff), His Honour opining that the recipient had been placed in a position of unfairness. 

Outcome & Next Steps 

Aside from the additional time and costs inherent in responding to an application to set aside a statutory demand, creditors who are ultimately unsuccessful in defending such proceedings may find themselves, ironically, faced with a costs order in favour of the very company from which they are seeking payment.

Polczynski Lawyers in Sydney, Australia can assist creditors by issuing statutory demands and commencing proceedings to recover debts owed. For companies that have received a statutory demand, about which there is a genuine dispute, offsetting claim, defect or some other reason to set the demand aside, Polczynski Lawyers can advise and, if appropriate, make an application pursuant to section 459G of the Act to set aside the demand.

Business News

Buffett says Berkshire 'fine' with Trump or Clinton
Sat, 30 Apr 2016 18:15:36 -0400
OMAHA, Neb. (Reuters) - Warren Buffett said on Saturday that Berkshire Hathaway Inc is poised to do ...
With weak earnings in tow, focus turns to jobs data
Sat, 30 Apr 2016 11:19:10 -0400
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Coming off a barrage of flimsy company earnings reports that included Apple's f...
Apple's stock suffers worst week since 2013
Fri, 29 Apr 2016 16:15:52 -0400
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Apple Inc on Friday ended its worst week on the stock market since 2013 as...
Facebook hit with lawsuit over plan to issue new stock
Fri, 29 Apr 2016 21:29:53 -0400
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - A Facebook Inc shareholder filed a proposed class action lawsuit on Frida...

Upcoming Events

Europe/Middle East Regional Meeting and Lawyers Next Generation (Budapest) from 5pm on Friday the 16th of September, 2016 to 5pm on Saturday the 17th of September, 2016

See All Events