Briebach v Host-Plus Pty Ltd [2023] FCA 1122

Briebach v Host-Plus Pty Ltd [2023] FCA 1122

AFCA erred by treating the trustee's Business rules as governing rules binding on members and by concluding that the applicant was not a member and had not made an investment choice. No event under cl 21.8 of the Trust Deed had occurred, so the applicant remained a member; her 5 December 2011 Stable investment choice remained in force; there was no need to open a new account or treat her as a deemed member; and the TPD insurance proceeds should have been credited and invested in accordance with her existing investment choice nomination. The AFCA determination was therefore set aside and remitted.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 September 2023
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Australian Financial Complaints Authority Superannuation Determination / Final Judgment Allowing Appeal and Remitting Matter to AFCA
Outcome
Appeal allowed; AFCA determination set aside and matter remitted to AFCA to be determined again according to law.
Legal Topics
['afca Superannuation Complaint' 'trust Deed Governing Rules' 'business Rules' 'membership of Superannuation Fund' 'investment Choice Nomination' 'total and Permanent Disablement Benefit' 'allocation of Negative Earnings']
['superannuation' 'administrative Law' 'financial Services' 'trusts'] ['afca Superannuation Complaint' 'trust Deed Governing Rules' 'business Rules' 'membership of Superannuation Fund' 'investment Choice Nomination' 'total and Permanent Disablement Benefit' 'allocation of Negative Earnings']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Australian Financial Complaints Authority Superannuation Determination / Final Judgment Allowing Appeal and Remitting Matter to AFCA

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether AFCA made a determination contrary to the governing rules of the Fund, including rr. 13.2 and 21.8 of the Trust Deed, in concluding that the applicant had ceased to be a member, was not a member on and from 5 November 2019, and had not made an investment choice election by 5 November 2019.' 'Whether AFCA misconstrued the Business rules of the Fund as part of the governing rules of the Fund and as precluding challenge to acts complying with those Business rules.' "Whether Business rule 12.15 required the TPD insurance proceeds to be credited in accordance with the applicant's investment choice election." 'Whether Business rule 5.7 required the trustee to open a new account and treat the applicant as a deemed member.' 'Whether the applicant had made an investment choice selection that remained in force when the TPD benefit was received.']

Ratio Decidendi

AFCA erred by treating the trustee's Business rules as governing rules binding on members and by concluding that the applicant was not a member and had not made an investment choice. No event under cl 21.8 of the Trust Deed had occurred, so the applicant remained a member; her 5 December 2011 Stable investment choice remained in force; there was no need to open a new account or treat her as a deemed member; and the TPD insurance proceeds should have been credited and invested in accordance with her existing investment choice nomination. The AFCA determination was therefore set aside and remitted.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; AFCA determination set aside and matter remitted to AFCA to be determined again according to law.

Orders

  • ['The appeal be allowed.' 'The determination of the Australian Financial Complaints Authority given on 24 February 2022 be set aside and, pursuant to s 1057(4) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), the matter be remitted to the Australian Financial Complaints Authority to be determined again according to law.']