• Level 5, Evandale Place, 142 Bundall Road, Bundall, QLD, Australia

Blog

AI Fail

Artificial Intelligence is being increasingly used by clients attempting to reduce their reliance on lawyers, and in some cases by lawyers themselves in legal research.  In a US decision of Mata v Avianca Inc (2023), submissions were prepared using Chat GPT, citing a number of court decisions, and these submissions were provided to the court.  Unfortunately, a number of the decisions supplied by Chat GPT in support of the submissions – and quoted in the submissions – did not exist. This experience is to some extent consistent with our observations when reviewing material created by third parties utilising Artificial Intelligence.  To some extent, a reader is lulled into a false sense of security as the material is quite often very well written, however it can have critical errors – such as a reliance on a statutory provision which no longer exists.  The circumstances of Mata v Avianca Inc [2023] are a timely caution that when it comes to the use of Artificial Intelligence to prepare documents, one cannot be confident that the content is accurate or the sources quoted are current or exist.  If your preference is for documents to be created by a human – and correctly – please contact our commercial and property team, Peter Muller at peterm@qbmlaw.com.au Jessica Murray at jessicam@qbmlaw.com.au or Megan Sarroff at Megans@qbmlaw.com.au  

Tenancy Termination Trap

An application for the termination of a residential tenancy has failed because – even though the Notice to Leave was properly given and gave more time than was required for the tenant to leave – QCAT found that the last day to leave (stated in the Notice to fall on a Saturday) was extended until the following Monday. In the decision of Adjudicator Alan Walsh in Coastlink Property Services Pty Ltd v Chapman & Anor [2023] QCAT 452, Adjudicator Walsh considered the timing issues associated with the giving of notices to leave.  The effect of his decision (which follows previous QCAT authority) is that: Adjudicator Walsh pointed out that there was no warning about this in the forms.  The lesson to be learned from this matter is that – with Notices to Leave and notices generally – one must be very careful of the ramifications if the time for compliance falls on a weekend, public holiday, or other Excluded Day. For advice in relation to property and commercial matters, contact our property lawyers, Peter Muller at peterm@qbmlaw.com.au Jessica Murray at jessicam@qbmlaw.com.au or Megan Sarroff at Megans@qbmlaw.com.au  

Expanded unfair contracts provisions in effect from 9 November, 2023

Expansions to the Unfair Contracts provisions of the Australian Consumer Law come into effect on 9 November 2023. These provisions substantially widen the application of the legislation to “standard form” contracts, whether with consumers or businesses where one party to the contract is a business that employs less than 100 people (subject to adjustment for part time employees), or has a turnover in the previous year less than $10M. Importantly, there are now penalties for unfair contract terms, which will be a significant deterrent from their use. If you use standard forms of contract, it should be checked for compliance. For advice in relation to these matters, contact Peter Muller or Megan Hanneman on 5574 0111.

Penalty for Not Voting in Referendum 14 October 2023

Do you know that there is a fine for not voting in Referendum 14 October 2023? With the referendum only a few days away, there are many people who have not yet decided whether their inherent distrust of politicians outweighs their inherent distrust of sensationalist media. So what is the consequence if you cannot, or don’t vote? Voting is compulsory in Australia in both federal elections and referendums (though under different legislation). In the case of the referendum it is under sec 45 of the Referendum (Machinery Provisions) Act 1984 which is in similar terms to the Electoral Act 1918, The section is set out below, but essentially if you don’t vote it is an offence. You are likely to get a penalty notice which entitles you to pay a penalty of $20 to deal with the offence at first instance if you cannot satisfy the notice in another way. If you don’t, then the prosecution could result in a far higher exposure – about $313 plus costs. There are also similar potential exposures for submitting false or misleading information to attempt to explain the failure to vote. Sec 45 of the Referendum (Machinery Provisions) Act 1984 45  Compulsory voting              (1)  It is the duty of every elector to vote at a referendum.              (2)  The Electoral Commissioner must, after the voting day at a referendum, being a referendum the voting day for which was not the same as that fixed for the polling at a Senate election or a general election of members of the House of Representatives, prepare for each Division a list of the names and addresses of the electors who appear to have failed to vote at the referendum.              (3)  Subject to subsection (4), within the period of 3 months after the voting day at a referendum, each DRO must:                      (a)  send a penalty notice by post; or                      (b)  arrange for a penalty notice to be delivered by other means; to the latest known address of each elector whose name appears on the list prepared under subsection (2).              (4)  The DRO is not required to send or deliver a penalty notice if he or she is satisfied that the elector:                      (a)  is dead; or                      (b)  was absent from Australia on the voting day for the referendum; or                      (c)  was ineligible to vote at the referendum; or                      (d)  had a valid and sufficient reason for failing to vote.              (5)  A penalty notice is a notice in an approved form notifying the elector that:                      (a)  the elector appears to have failed to vote at the referendum; and                      (b)  it is an offence to fail to vote at a referendum without a valid and sufficient reason for the failure; and                      (c)  if the elector does not wish to have the apparent failure to vote dealt with by a court, the elector may, within the prescribed time:                               (i)  if the elector did vote as required by this Act—give the DRO particulars of the circumstances of the elector’s voting; or                              (ii)  if the elector failed to vote—give the DRO a valid and sufficient reason for the failure; or                             (iii)  pay to the DRO a penalty of $20.              (6)  If an elector does not respond to a penalty notice in the manner indicated in subparagraph (5)(c)(i), (ii) or (iii), within the prescribed time, the DRO must send by post or deliver to the elector, at his or her latest known address, a second penalty notice, having, subject to subsection (7), the same form as the first such notice but bearing a notation to the effect that a previous notice in the same terms was sent to the elector but that a response in the manner indicated in subparagraph (5)(c)(i), (ii) or (iii) was not received.              (7)  The provisions of this section, other than subsection (6), apply in relation to a second penalty notice:                      (a)  as if it were a penalty notice issued under subsection (3); and                      (b)  as if, in the provisions of this section as so applied, references to paragraphs and subparagraphs of subsection (5) included references to those paragraphs and subparagraphs as applied by this section.              (8)  If, within the prescribed time:                      (a)  an elector responds to a penalty notice in the manner indicated in subparagraph (5)(c)(i) or (ii) and the DRO to whom the response has been given is satisfied:                               (i)  in the case of a response of the kind referred to in subparagraph (5)(c)(i)—that the elector did vote as required by this Act; or                              (ii)  in the case of a response of the kind referred to in subparagraph (5)(c)(ii)—that the reason for the failure to vote is a valid and sufficient reason; or                      (b)  an elector responds to a penalty notice by paying the penalty of $20; proceedings against the elector for a contravention of subsection (14) are prohibited.              (9)  If the DRO to whom a response to a penalty notice has been given under subparagraph (5)(c)(i) or (ii) within the prescribed time is not satisfied:                      (a)  in the case of a response of the kind referred to in subparagraph (5)(c)(i)—that the elector voted as required by this Act; or                      (b)  in the case of a response of the kind referred to in subparagraph (5)(c)(ii)—that the reason for the failure to vote is a valid and sufficient reason; the DRO must send by post or deliver to the elector, at his or her latest known address, a notice in an approved form, notifying the elector that:                      (c)  the DRO is not so satisfied; and                      (d)  if the elector does not wish to have the apparent failure to vote without a valid and sufficient reason for such failure dealt with by a court, he or she may, within the prescribed time, pay to the DRO a penalty of $20.            (10)  If, in response to a notice under subsection (9), the penalty of $20 is paid to the DRO within the prescribed time, proceedings