Williams v Is Industry Fund Pty Ltd

In this appeal, Mr Williams appeals the decision of the Superannuation Complaints Tribunal, which affirmed the decision of IS Industry. The appeal to the Federal Court is limited to a question of law. The central issue in this appeal is whether the Tribunal was required to consider certain matters when determining if an interdependency relationship existed between Mr Williams and his deceased son immediately before the latter’s death, as per s 10A of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (Cth) and r 1.04AAAA of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Regulations 1994 (Cth). Specifically, the court had to decide if the Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant and the deceased had an interdependency relationship immediately before the death of the deceased and whether the Tribunal was required to determine if the applicant and the deceased were living together immediately before the death of the deceased. Additionally, the court had to determine if the Tribunal was required to consider that the deceased suffered from a physical disability.

The court found that the Tribunal was indeed required to consider these matters as relevant considerations when determining if an interdependency relationship existed between Mr Williams and his deceased son. The court held that the Tribunal failed to take into account a relevant consideration which it was bound to, specifically whether the reason Mr Williams and his son were not living together was because his son suffered from a physical, intellectual or psychiatric disability. The court also found that the Tribunal’s consideration of the matter was erroneous, as it confined its analysis to the period up to May 2011, rather than the period immediately before the deceased’s death.

The court concluded that the appeal must be allowed, and Mr Williams is entitled to the orders sought in his notice of appeal filed on 20 April 2015. The decision of the Superannuation Complaints Tribunal dated 17 March 2015 is set aside, and the matter is remitted to the Superannuation Complaints Tribunal to be heard and determined according to law and the reasons provided in the court’s decision. The first respondent is to pay the applicant’s costs of the appeal.