===============
RSS Feed now available
===============
How can you check on whether there is any thing new on this page without having to go to it or without getting a reminder email from us?

Use our RSS (short for really simple syndication) Feed!

All you need to do is get access to a newsreader or aggregator (like Bloglines) and click on the orange XML button on the left hand side of this page and you will be alerted when something new is posted.

 
=============
Summer School
=============
Our weekly Summer School series of brief updates continues with Corporate Governance on 3 February and finally Wealth and Succession Planning on 10 February 2004.

Register

 
=================
Queensland stamp duty reduction promised
=================
The Queensland Premier has promised to increase the threshold for receiving a full stamp-duty rebate from $80,000 to $250,000 for first-home buyers from July 1 if is re-elected on 7 February.

A re-elected Beattie government will also increase the amount at which the partial stamp-duty rebate for first home buyers will cut out to $500,000. The rebate now cuts out completely at $160,000. This reflects the increase in the price of the average home.

More on the Queensland election from the ABC

 
======================
AIRC upholds Centrelink sacking for breach of email policy
======================

In Williams v Centrelink (U2003/4372, 15 January 2004), the Australian Industrial Relations Commission upheld the dismissal of a worker who was found to have breached Centrelink’s email policy by emailing sexually explicit jokes and images to both to colleagues and external recipients.

The applicant was one of twenty four persons in his office who were investigated by Centrelink. After two employees resigned, the investigation resulted in two others (including the applicant) being sacked, five employees receiving reprimands and the rest being either demoted or receiving salary reductions.

The Australian Council of Trade Unions (“ACTU”) claimed that the sacking raises important workplace privacy issues. Linda Rubinstein, the ACTU's senior industrial officer, stated on ABC radio that the case “…raise[s] the whole issue of the extent to which private use of email and the internet at work is acceptable, the extent to which it does remain private, or it can be monitored by the employer…”.

More from Presidian

 
============================
DOCUMENT RETENTION AND DESTRUCTION POST-BRITISH AMERICAN TOBACCO CASE:
WHAT CAN YOU DESTROY?
============================
On 11 April 2002, Rolah Ann McCabe was awarded a $700,000.00 damages judgment against British American Tobacco Australia Services Ltd (BATAS) in the Victorian Supreme Court.

In summary, judgment was given when the Trial Judge struck out the defence of BATAS as a result of its failure to comply with discovery orders (requiring it to identify relevant documents) and its deliberate destruction of documents in order to defeat prospective litigants including the plaintiff. He found that BATAS had acted improperly and denied the plaintiff a fair trial of her claim for damages for lung cancer caused by her addiction to cigarettes manufactured by BATAS.

On appeal, on 6 December 2002 the judgment was set aside. The Supreme Court of Victoria Court of Appeal analysed the current legal position with respect to destruction of documents both before and after the commencement of litigation.

Meanwhile, (in October 2002), the major American accounting firm, Arthur Andersen, received a $500,000.00 fine and five years probation for destruction of documents relating to its client, Enron, after it was aware that civil litigation and government investigations were imminent.

Is a document retention policy unlawful? Our article addresses the key legal issues relating to document retention.

 
=================
Better Practice Guidelines for Spam
=================
The National Office for the Information Economy (“NOIE”) has released a draft of "The Spam Act 2003 and Better Practice Guidelines" which, upon completion, are intended to provide a guide for businesses on how to comply with the Spam Act 2003.

The NOIE is interested in receiving public input on how the guide can be made clearer and more useful to Australian business.

 
===========================
Bank not Obliged to Disclose Property Valuation to Loan Customers
===========================
In ACCC V Oceana Commercial Pty Ltd & Ors [2003] FCA 1516, the Federal Court of Australia dismissed a claim by the ACCC that the Commonwealth Bank was obliged to provide certain investment loan customers with the contents of its valuation of the investment property, or otherwise alert them that they may have paid too much for the property so that they might seek their own advice.

More

 
====================
GST treatment of lease incentives
====================
GST Ruling GSTR 2003/16 (released on 17 December 2003) sets out the ATO's views as to how inducements provided by a landlord or a tenant for the entry (or agreement to enter) into a lease of commercial premises should be treated for GST purposes. These are referred to a "lease inducements" in the Ruling, and include lease incentives and lease premiums.

The ruling provides guidance on how to determine whether a payment or other consideration is consideration for a separate supply from the supply of the premises and considers the GST treatment of these separate supplies.

The Ruling deals with:
Lease inducements with non-monetary consideration ;
Cash incentives ;
Fitout incentives and plant ;
income guarantees;
Rent-free or rent discounted periods and
Lease premiums.