Wan v BT Funds Management Limited

In the case of Wan v BT Funds Management Limited, the court was tasked with determining whether the primary judge and the Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) erred in concluding that the decision of the trustee of a superannuation fund to distribute a member's superannuation death benefit to his estate, rather than to the appellant, was fair and reasonable. The primary issue was whether the appellant qualified as a "dependant" of the deceased under sections 10 and 10A of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (Cth) (SIS Act). This hinged on the interpretation of the terms "lives with" and "lives together" within the context of the SIS Act. The appellant argued that both the Authority and the primary judge erred in their construction of these terms and in their consideration of the deceased's will provisions.

The court found that neither the Authority nor the primary judge made any legal error in their determination. The court emphasised that the Authority's determination must be read in its proper context and that the Authority did not require the living arrangement to be full-time or permanent. The court also noted that neither the Authority nor the primary judge elevated the significance of "common residence" in their assessment of whether the appellant was a dependant under the SIS Act. Additionally, the court held that the primary judge was correct in considering the provisions made for the appellant in the deceased's will, and that a wider construction of the term "dependant" was not required.

Consequently, the court upheld the primary judge's conclusion that the Authority made no legal error in determining that the decision of the Trustee was fair and reasonable and within power. The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to pay the costs of the appeal as agreed or assessed. The second respondent was required to file and serve any application for costs within 14 days of the date of the order.