SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA
(Civil)
AUSTRALIANSUPER PTY LTD v MCMILLAN
[2021] SASC 147
Judgment of the Honourable Justice Blue
SUPERANNUATION - PRIVATE SECTOR FUNDS - TRUSTEES - GENERALLY
SUPERANNUATION - PRIVATE SECTOR FUNDS - AMENDMENT OF TRUST DEED
EQUITY - TRUSTS AND TRUSTEES - POWERS, DUTIES, RIGHTS AND LIABILITIES OF TRUSTEES - MISCELLANEOUS OTHER POWERS, DUTIES AND LIABILITIES - POWER TO VARY TRUSTS
The applicant seeks an order under section 59C of the Trustee Act 1936 (SA) varying the AustralianSuper Trust Deed governing the AustralianSuper Superannuation Fund to insert a new rule 4A empowering the trustee of the Fund to charge a Trustee Risk Reserve Fee.
The motivation for the proposed amendment is that, particularly after 1 January 2022, the trustee of the Fund, and trustees of superannuation funds generally, will be liable to the potential imposition of fines and penalties in relation to any contravention of Commonwealth laws in respect of which they will not be indemnified by their respective superannuation funds. The Applicant has no significant capital of its own out of which to pay any such fine or penalty and in this respect is in a similar position to other trustees of industry superannuation funds.
Held:
1Proper construction of subsections 56(2) and 57(2) of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (Cth) considered (at [92]-[113]).
2The proposed rule would not be rendered void by subsections 56(2) or 57(2) of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (Cth) (at [145]).
3In the absence of the acquisition by the Applicant of substantial capital, it would be rendered insolvent by the imposition of any significant non-indemnifiable penalty and this would cause very substantial costs and losses to the Fund and thereby to the beneficiaries (at [149]).
4A preferable mechanism to provide capital to a trustee in the position of the Applicant would be for the superannuation fund to acquire shares in the trustee company but this is presently precluded by the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Regulations 1994 (Cth) (at [165]‑[183]).
5Given current legislative provisions and time constraints, it is not possible to satisfactorily mitigate that risk by 1 January 2022 other than by the introduction of a trustee risk fee of the type proposed (at [184]).
6In the circumstances, there is good reason to vary the trust deed and it is in the interests of the beneficiaries to do so (at [185]).
7In the circumstances, the variation will not result in one class of beneficiaries being unfairly advantaged to the prejudice of another class (at [206]).
8The proposed variation accords as far as reasonably practicable with the spirit of the trust, will not disturb the trust beyond what is necessary to give effect to the reasons for the variation and is not motivated by taxation minimisation considerations (at [201]-[203]).
9Given the lack of empirical data and other limitations, the trust deed should be varied to provide for charging by the trustee of an annual risk fee in an amount equal to 0.015% per annum of the net assets of the Fund subject…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read AustralianSuper Pty Ltd v McMillan and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2021] SASC 147
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Orders
Orders of the court
Held:
1 Proper construction of subsections 56(2) and 57(2) of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (Cth) considered (at [92]-[113]).
2 The proposed rule would not be rendered void by subsections 56(2) or 57(2) of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (Cth) (at [145]).
3 In the absence of the acquisition by the Applicant of substantial capital, it would be rendered insolvent by the imposition of any significant non-indemnifiable penalty and this would cause very substantial costs and losses to the Fund and thereby to the beneficiaries (at [149]).
4 A preferable mechanism to provide capital to a trustee in the position of the Applicant would be for the superannuation fund to acquire shares in the trustee company but this is presently precluded by the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Regulations 1994 (Cth) (at [165]‑[183]).
5 Given current legislative provisions and time constraints, it is not possible to satisfactorily mitigate that risk by 1 January 2022 other than by the introduction of a trustee risk fee of the type proposed (at [184]).
6 In the circumstances, there is good reason to vary the trust deed and it is in the interests of the beneficiaries to do so (at [185]).
7 In the circumstances, the variation will not result in one class of beneficiaries being unfairly advantaged to the prejudice of another class (at [206]).
8 The proposed variation accords as far as reasonably practicable with the spirit of the trust, will not disturb the trust beyond what is necessary to give effect to the reasons for the variation and is not motivated by taxation minimisation considerations (at [201]-[203]).
9 Given the lack of empirical data and other limitations, the trust deed should be varied to provide for charging by the trustee of an annual risk fee in an amount equal to 0.015% per annum of the net assets of the Fund subject to charging of a lesser amount by the trustee with a monetary ceiling on the annual fee fixed by reference to the trustee risk reserve not exceeding 0.015% per annum of the net assets of the Fund (at [211]).
10 Consideration of the other terms of the proposed new rule (at [212]-[239]).
11 Order to be made varying the trust deed (at [243]).
Background
Background to the litigation
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Decision
Reasons for decision
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
The Policy provides that the Board will determine a Target Amount of the Risk Reserve with effect from 1 January 2022, to be reviewed at 1 January 2023 and thereafter at least biennially. The Policy provides that, in the event that a material payment (exceeding 10 per cent of the balance of the Risk Reserve) is made from the Risk Reserve, management will review the balance of the Risk Reserve as against the Target Amount and develop a replenishment plan for recommendation to the Board in setting the amount of the Risk Fee. Rationale for the proposed amendment The background to the proposed introduction of the Risk Fee is that AusSuper only has share capital of $12 and after 1 January 2022 it will not be able to be indemnified by the Fund against a liability for a fine or civil or administrative penalty or amount payable under an infringement notice under Commonwealth legislation (collectively a penalty). The rationale for the proposed introduction of the Risk Fee is that the Trustee would become insolvent if it were to incur a penalty in any significant amount. If AusSuper were to become insolvent, it would be unable to continue as trustee of the Fund. Section 120(2) of the Supervision Act defines a “disqualified person” amongst others as a company in respect of which a receiver, manager, administrator or provisional liquidator has been appointed or which is being wound up. Section 126K prohibits a disqualified person from acting as a trustee of a superannuation entity. Sections 133 and 134 empower APRA to remove a disqualified person as trustee of a superannuation entity and appoint a replacement trustee to act as trustee until the vacancy is filled. At first sight, it might be thought that it would be relatively easy for AusSuper to be replaced with an alternative trustee of the Fund. However, the evidence establishes that this is not the case and that there would be a very substantial cost and detriment to the Fund and therefore to the members of the Fund in that event. If AusSuper were unable to continue as trustee of the Fund, theoretically there would be three alternatives. First, the appointment of a replacement trustee to take over as the long term trustee of the Fund. Secondly, a winding up of the fund under the control of a short term replacement trustee. Thirdly, a merger of the fund with another superannuation fund under the control of a short term replacement trustee. Any replacement trustee (whether long term or short term) would be required to hold an AFS licence from ASIC and an RSE licence from APRA. APRA indicated in submissions that it would be unlikely to appoint or license a replacement trustee that had the same directors as a trustee that had become a disqualified person. It appears that there are three companies that hold an RSE licence that could be appointed by APRA as an acting trustee. However, that power has never been exercised in respect of a large superannuation fund of the order of the Fund. Any trustee appointed by APRA would only be an acting trustee in the short term and it would still be necessary to procure a long term replacement trustee if the first alternative could be pursued. Any acting trustee appointed by APRA would charge substantial fees.