All Topics

We recently examined how fraud can undermine indefeasibility and the resulting risks for lenders. You can read that article here: Indefeasibility of title - legal certainty in an age of rising fraud. This article analyses the High Court of Australia’s decision in Stubbings v Jams 2 Pty Ltd [2022] HCA 6, which remains the leading authority on responsible lending practices, notwithstanding the passage of four years since judgment.

The NSW Court of Appeal’s decision in Piety Developments Pty Ltd v Cumberland City Council is a timely reminder that, for councils, passing a resolution to “accept” an offer is not the same thing as entering into a legally binding contract. Even where a resolution is passed in open session, livestreamed, and later recorded in Council minutes, it may still fall well short of creating enforceable contractual rights.

When seeking legal advice for complaints or referrals, it is important for health practitioners to understand the scope of their Professional Indemnity Insurance (PII). PII generally covers legal defence costs, assistance during investigations, and any damages or penalties that fall within the policy terms. However, most insurance policies contain clauses that prohibit practitioners from admitting liability without the consent of the insurer.