A timely article on political parties and the Privacy Act

November 27, 2018

The ABC in Political parties may know a lot more about you than you think has undertaken a neat, informative though hardly ground breaking piece on how political parties hoover up masses of personal information without any need to comply with the Privacy Act 1988.  Because they are exempt from the operations of the Privacy Act.  It is a topic that has been covered from time to time in the past, recently in Australia should strengthen its privacy laws and remove exemptions for politicians.

This exemption has been a longstanding flaw, among the many other flaws, of the Act.  It has been a flaw that both major political parties have Read the rest of this entry »

Jolimont Heights Pty Ltd v Ryan [2018] VSC 678 (9 November 2018): section 459 of Corporations Act, application to set aside statutory demand, genuine dispute

November 22, 2018

The Victorian Supreme Court, per Matthews JR, considered an application to set aside a statutory demand in  Jolimont Heights Pty Ltd v Ryan [2018] VSC 678.

FACTS

Jolimont Heights Pty Ltd (‘JH’), made an application pursuant to s 459G of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (‘Act’) by originating process dated 9 July 2018 to set aside a statutory demand dated 19 June 2018 (‘Statutory Demand’)  [1].

The application was made under s 459H &/or s 459J on the basis:

  • there was a genuine dispute as to the existence of the debt
  • due to some other reason, being that the Statutory Demand was defective  [2].

In support of its application, JH relied on Read the rest of this entry »

Guy Fawkes Day – Remember remember the fifth of November

November 5, 2018

The whole Guy Fawkes story and its consequences is so compelling that it often inspires me to break policy and write on a non legal subject.

For starters there is the wonderful ditty/ poem or piece of doggerel:

Remember, remember!
The fifth of November,
The Gunpowder treason and plot;
I know of no reason
Why the Gunpowder treason
Should ever be forgot!
Guy Fawkes and his companions
Did the scheme contrive,
To blow the King and Parliament
All up alive.
Threescore barrels, laid below,
To prove old England’s overthrow.
But, by God’s providence, him they catch,
With a dark lantern, lighting a match!
A stick and a stake
For King James’s sake!
If you won’t give me one,
I’ll take two,
The better for me,
And the worse for you.
A rope, a rope, to hang the Pope,
A penn’orth of cheese to choke him,
A pint of beer to wash it down,
And a jolly good fire to burn him.
Holloa, boys! holloa, boys! make the bells ring!
Holloa, boys! holloa boys! God save the King!
Hip, hip, hooor-r-r-ray! Read the rest of this entry »

Australian Defence Contractor Austel suffers data breach

November 3, 2018

Austel, one of Australia’s main defence contractors has suffered a data breach.  It notified the Australian Securities Exchange last Thursday night.  The notice to the ASX is found here.  Unlike US notices it’s focus is on being vague on critical details and expansive on the impact, it says not much, and what it is doing in response, it says plenty.

The Notice states:

Austal Limited (ASX:ASB) advised that its Australian business has detected and responded to a breach of the company’s data management systems by an unknown offender.
Austal referred this matter to the Australian Cyber Security Centre (ACSC) and the Australian Federal Police who have provided ongoing assistance and advice. Austal Australia’s Information Systems and Technology (IS&T) team have restored the security and integrity of the company’s data systems and have implemented, and continues to implement, additional security measures to prevent further breaches. A small number of stakeholders who were potentially directly impacted have been informed.
The data breach has had no impact on Austal’s ongoing operations. Austal’s business in the United States is unaffected by this issue as the computer systems are not linked.
No company wants to lose control of its information, but there is no evidence to date to suggest that information affecting national security nor the commercial operations of the company have been stolen: ship design drawings which may be distributed to customers and fabrication sub – contractors or suppliers are neither sensitive nor classified.
Some staff email addresses and mobile phone numbers were accessed and these staff members have been informed accordingly. The Office of the Australian Information Co
mmissioner will be involved as required.
Following the breach the offender purported to offer certain materials for sale on the internet and engage in extortion. The company has not and will not respond to the extortion attempts.
Austal cannot provide any additional information at this time

The statement, anodyne as any I have seen, confirms that the hacker attempted an extortion attempt.  What the report does not state but the Australian does is that the attack took place two weeks ago and involved the loss of 100 gigabytes of data. There is another report that the material was accessed over a month ago.  The Australian’s reports that Read the rest of this entry »

Re Ad Astra Institute Pty Ltd [2018] VSC 563 (25 September 2018) and : Section 359G Corporations Act, application to set aside statutory demand, 21 day affidavit required to ‘raise’ or ‘identify’ a particular ground expressly, genuine dispute, offsetting claim.

The Victorian Supreme Court in Re Ad Astra Institute Pty Ltd [2018] VSC 563 considered an application to set aside a statutory demand.  In dismissing the application the court undertook a useful analysis of both genuine dispute but more particularly the approach to be taken in preparing an offsetting claim.

FACTS

The defendant was engaged to develop QMS and other documentation (‘Training Documentation’) to meet the requirements of being a Registered Training Organisation (‘RTO’) and on the Commonwealth Register of Institutions and Courses for Overseas Students (‘CRICOS’) [4].

In July of 2016, the plaintiff offered the defendant a contract for services, [4], with consultancy fees at:

    • an hourly rate (minimum of 3 hours) $575 per hour + GST
  • daily rate (maximum of 8 hours) $2,800 per day + GST [5].

The note at the bottom of the consultancy fees provides:

Please note:The terms of all invoices are 14 days and all invoices will be charged according to the hourly rate plus GST (Goods and Services Tax). These rates are reviewed from time to time and may change. We will tell you of any changes as soon as practicable after a change occurs [6].

with a further stipulation :

As negotiated:It is agreed that IRM [the Defendant] will cap its fees payable for initial registration and CRICOS registration at AUD$100,000 inclusive of required ASQA fees.

The Agreement was set out to have been made on 25 July 2016 and executed by James Sackl on behalf of the plaintiff. At all material times Read the rest of this entry »