You web browser may not be properly supported. To use this site and all its features we recommend using the latest versions of Chrome, Safari or Firefox

Financial Advice 2

Think twice or suffer the consequences.

The NSW Supreme Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Tanamerah Estates Pty Ltd v Tibra Capital Pty Ltd [2016] NSWCA 23 (Tanamerah) is a timely reminder to corporations that in many cases, it must be legally represented in any court proceedings it is involved in.

The requirement for a corporation to be represented by a lawyer in civil proceedings is found in the civil procedure rules of most states and territories. As an example, in Victoria, r 1.17 of the Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2015 (Vic) states that:

Except where otherwise provided by or under any Act or these Rules, a corporation, whether or not a party, shall not take any step in a proceeding save by a solicitor.

Some steps in a legal proceeding are time-critical and as such, being unable to secure legal representation before the deadline can expose a company to potentially severe adverse consequences. As an example, if a corporation is served with a creditor’s statutory demand for payment of a debt and disputes that debt, it must, within 21 days of being served with that statutory demand, issue proceedings to have it set aside. If the corporation fails to do so or otherwise does not comply with the statutory demand within the prescribed time limit, the corporation becomes exposed to winding up proceedings by that creditor.

In Tanamerah, Tanamerah Estates Pty Ltd had commenced proceedings in the Supreme Court of New South Wales to set aside a statutory demand that had been served on it. The company was represented by a director of the company however, the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) (Rules) stipulates that a company may only be represented by a director if that director is also a plaintiff in the proceedings (which, in this case, they were not). As the company had not complied with the Rules, and had not provided any explanation for its decision to not retain a lawyer, the Court dismissed the proceeding with costs. A subsequent application by the corporation to appeal the Court’s decision was also dismissed.

The Tanamerah decision highlights that courts take the requirement that corporations be legally represented very seriously and will enforce those requirements.

If your corporation is contemplating legal action against another party or anticipates legal action being taken against it, we recommend that you obtain legal representation as early as possible to avoid any unnecessary costs or delays, or adverse consequences later on down the track.

If you would like to speak to one of our experienced lawyers about a dispute your company is involved in, please contact us by completing the enquiry form below.

The contents of this blog post are considered accurate as at the date of publication. However the applicable laws may be subject to change, thereby affecting the accuracy of the article. The information contained in this blog post is of a general nature only and is not specific to anyone’s personal circumstances. Please seek legal advice before acting on any of the information contained in this post.

Thank you for your feedback.

Related blog posts

Consumer and the Law
Liar loans: how mortgage brokers are putting clients at risk

The term ‘liar loans’ has been coined on the back of the Banking Royal Commission. This is because studies have shown almost 40 per cent of loan applications completed through mortgage brokers contained at least one factually incorrect statement. Whether mortgage brokers are providing lenders with incorrect information, or information that is out-of-date, they are putting themselves – and their clients – at risk. A recent study conducted by the Consumer Credit Legal Centre in New South Wales identified some mortgage brokers were breaking the law when filling out loan applications for their clients. Common examples included brokers suggesting their clients provide a different answer...

Planning desk close up documentresize
Consumer and the Law
How to lodge a complaint with Australian Financial Complaints Authority

The Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) acts as the middleperson between financial firms and consumers or small businesses, offering free and independent dispute resolution services. It deals with complaints about financial advice, insurance, banking and superannuation products and services. While the time limit to lodge a complaint to AFCA is usually between two and six years, the Australian Government recently created the opportunity for those with complaints up to 10 years old to come forward. This means consumers and small businesses have until 30 June 2020 to lodge complaints dating back to 1 January 2008. To lodge a complaint, you must follow AFCA’s process. It is...

How to lodge a complaint with Australian Financial Complaints Authority
Business Law
Proposed Changes to the Franchising Code of Conduct

Franchising is big business in Australia, with approximately 1,120 franchise systems and 79,000 franchise units operating nationally1. As franchising is a diverse sector with characteristics that are unique from other business models, franchises are governed by a mandatory Franchising Code of Conduct (Franchising Code).2 The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services recently completed an inquiry into the operation and effectiveness of the Franchising Code and has released the Fairness in Franchising Report (Report).3 Some of the key findings and recommendations of the report are discussed below. The Committee recommends that the Australian Government establish an...

Waitress In Black Apron Upload

We're here to help

Start your online claim check now. Or, if you have a question, get in touch with our team.