- In 2002, Francesca (the deceased) and her husband Augusto established a SMSF known as The Conti Superannuation Fund (the CSF), both of whom were trustees and members. The deceased had four children, Augusto was not the father of those children.
- The deceased expressed in her Will in 2015 that she wished for her superannuation to be paid to her children and not to her husband Augusto. There was around $648,000 in the SMSF.
- The Trust Deed of the SMSF that stated that without a BDBN, the death benefits must be paid at the trustee’s discretion. When Francesca died, she died without a BDBN in place. After her death Augusto appointed a sole trustee company of which he was the sole director and shareholder. The new Corporate Trustee resolved to distribute the entirety of the deceased’s funds to Augusto, not being inclined to follow the wishes expressed in the Will.
- The executors of the estate brought an action against the trustee and Augusto arguing that they were entitled to be appointed as co-trustees of the fund. In that sense the children could frustrate the distribution of the super fund to Augusto.
- The Court found that whilst the SIS Act allows for an exec
- The children brought an action against Augusto which failed totally. Even though two of the children were Francesca’s estate’s executors they could not retrieve the benefits. First, they argued that the deed required the legal personal representative of Francesca to become the trustee of the SMSF as it stated within the trust that the SMSF must remain an SMSF, Augusto’s transference of the trustee from himself to his company changed the nature of the SMSF. However, this failed as the trustee is whoever the SMSF’s trust deed says it will be.
- Secondly the children state that as a trustee, Augusto has the discretion to act in good faith, have genuine consideration and make decisions in accordance with the purposes that the discretion was conferred upon the trustee in the first place. As Francesca’s wills stated the benefits should be paid to the children, they believed Augusto had not acted in good faith. This failed as well. Therefore, this case should teach that a trustee of a SMSF has enormous power over the benefits once the principle trustee has passed away.
Leave a Comment Cancel Comment
Search
Latest Post
- Narumon Pty Ltd (2018) QSC 185 March 1, 2022
- Munro v Munro [2015] QSC 61 March 1, 2022
- Ioppolo v Conti [2013] WASC 389 March 1, 2022
Most Commented
- COVID-19 Business Hardship Grant 5 Comments
- Trust Basics 4 Comments
- 7 Things you need in your Standard Terms of Trade 2 Comments
Categories
- Articles (16)
- Uncategorized (13)
Popular Tags
Appointer
Australian Law
BDBN
Beneficiaries
Binding Death Benefit Nomination
business
Business Hardship Grant
Capital Gains Tax
Certainty of Intention
Certainty of Object
Certainty of Subject
cestuis que use
Companies
Corporate Tax Rate
Corporations Act
Court action
COVID
Credits
Default Judgment
Department of Treasury and Finance
District Court
Enforcing Judgements
Enforcing judgment
Family Law Agreement
Family Marginal Tax Rate
Federal Budget
Fund
Letter of Demand
Magistrates Court
Magistrates Court Claim Form
Particulars of Claim
Perry v Nicholson
PPR
Section 102
section 126.15
Section 328_G
Service of Claim
Settlor
Small Business
SMSF
Stamp Duty
Superannuation
Tax reform
tRUST
Trustee
Archives
- March 2024 (2)
- May 2023 (2)
- March 2022 (6)
- February 2022 (6)
- January 2022 (5)
- November 2021 (1)
- October 2021 (1)
- September 2021 (2)
Comments
I came across your site wanting to learn more and you did not disappoint. Keep up the terrific work, and just so you know, I […] More...I came across your site wanting to learn more and you did not disappoint. Keep up the terrific work, and just so you know, I have bookmarked your page to stay in the loop of your future posts. Here is mine at 94N about Thai-Massage. Have a wonderful day! Less...