Allan McDougall Lawyer, Sydney in Sydney, Australia | Lawyer & law firm

Allan McDougall Lawyer, Sydney

Locality: Sydney, Australia

Phone: +61 2 8035 5200

Address: Level 13, 179 Elizabeth Street Sydney 2000 Sydney, NSW, Australia

Website: http://www.allanmcdougalllawyer.com.au

Likes: 56

Add/Update information

Reviews

Tags

• Lawyer & law firm

24.01.2022 Good advice about ridiculous restrictions on driving in NSW

24.01.2022 In this article, experienced insolvency and commercial dispute resolution lawyer Penelope Pengilley offers her opinion on how collaborative law practices, appli...ed to operate within a safe harbour, may facilitate shareholder dispute resolution and save the company. #Insolvency #SafeHarbour #Restructuring #InsolvencyLaw #CollaborativeLaw

23.01.2022 Whats that Warren Buffet saying about the outgoing tide revealing those who swim naked?

22.01.2022 The author of a Will can generally do whatever he or she likes. But the court has the authority to overrule a Will if it doesnt think the right thing has been done. So, disinheriting someone doesnt necessarily prevent that person challenging the Will. And in recent times there seem to have been many more cases in which Wills have been successfully challenged than not. However the tide seems to be turning, at least in NSW. Three generous family provisions awards by a lower c...ourt have been rejected on appeal to a higher court. In one case the higher court said that a Will cannot be overturned simply because the person who complained of missing out was in poor financial circumstances. In another case, the court said that the deceased author of the Will and another person could not be said to have been living together simply because that other person made repeat visits to provide care and occasionally slept overnight on the Will makers bedroom floor. And in a third case, whilst it may not seem right that a father had left his daughter $5 million and the mother nothing, the facts were that the marriage had broken down after 12 months over 25 years before, and the wife had received a generous property settlement at the time. These cases show that most of the time a Will as originally drafted should remain unchanged. See more

22.01.2022 Externalities are the problem.

21.01.2022 High Court wimps out (just) on rebuking Federal Police. Also parallels with TV series Secret City (starring Anna Torv).

21.01.2022 Gets the balance about right, I think..

21.01.2022 What is a "whistle blower"? The term came to prominence in the USA a few years ago when it was applied to people who tell others, usually outsiders, about wrong doing inside their big company, or increasingly big government department. For example, in Australia weve recently seen news reports about the former tax official being prosecuted for telling the media about heavy handed practices used by his employer to collect money owed by small businesses. What has grabbed the he...adlines is that the hapless whistle blower theoretically faces a prison sentence of up to 161 years for making his disclosures. So its understandable that a few people are getting somewhat excited about new whistle blower laws just brought in to protect such people. Except theres a catch (one of several) ... the disclosure must first be made internally, to an "eligible recipient". This usually means a higher-up manager within the big, offending bureaucracy. Only after nothings done for around 3 months, could the discloser possibly go to outsiders like the news media, where the whistle should truly be blown. So the new laws seem to miss the point a bit... See more

19.01.2022 Thought provoking 2014 report which "our" ABC had retract and ban due to outrage from the medical establishment.

17.01.2022 If youre flying in or out of Australia, at the airport a Border Force officer can ask you to hand over your smartphone, demand its password,and view the phones contents. Really? Well yes, it seems so. The Customs Act of 1901 may sound ancient, but electronics era amendments have given it new teeth. Can the officers do this any old time? Hopefully not - you would think they needed to have some kind of reasonable suspicion that you were up to no good, before peering into you ...phone, tablet or laptop. But this isnt set down in our statute law. We dont have protection against unlawful search or seizure like the Bill of Rights in the USA (the so-called Fourth Amendment), or in the EU, with its general Data Protection Regulation. Then again, that may all sound well and good of course, but, if youve traveled overseas recently, youll know that when youre in that customs queue the last thing on your mind is your legal rights. See more

16.01.2022 These new laws in WA allow the victims of domestic violence to break their lease without penalty and vacate their rented premises. And, rather than leaving, victims can even get a court order to kick out the perpetrator, so kids can keep going to the same school etc. Almost certainly will be replicated in other States

16.01.2022 Iconic local honey brand now rejected by Coles because its full of polluted ingredients from China and Argentina

15.01.2022 Its not all work ...

15.01.2022 We have had a huge victory. The Queensland Supreme Court has just determined that universities have no jurisdiction to adjudicate sexual assault. Justice Ann L...yons (pictured) has just made a judgement in a pivotal case involving a University of Queensland medical student who was accused of sexual assault by another student. Wendy Mulcahy, the lawyer for the accused student, took the matter to the Supreme Court arguing that UQ did not have the jurisdiction to adjudicate such matters. In her landmark judgement, Justice Lyons concluded universities are only entitled to make decisions in sexual assault cases which have been proved in criminal court. The universitys role is then to decide on any further penalty could be imposed on someone found criminally guilty of such a crime such as expelling him or her from the university. Heres Lyons statement: I consider that when read together, the University policy and procedures documents make it clear that the University only has jurisdiction in relation to criminal acts of a sexual nature where the alleged offence is proven. In my view that jurisdiction is limited to determining what penalty is to be imposed as a consequence of a finding that the alleged offence is proven. This means it is not the universitys job to investigate or determine the guilt in sexual assault cases. Lyons judgement brings into question the legality of the committees which have been established in universities across Australia to adjudicate these matters. Last month Senator Amanda Stoker grilled the university regulator, TEQSA, about the role of that organization in encouraging the establishment of these kangaroo courts. Lyons decision exposes TEQSAs complicity in this issue as even more shameful. Justice Lyons accepted Wendy Mulcahys concerns that a university committee is ill-equipped to conduct a fair investigation. She notes that it would indeed be a startling result if a committee comprised of academics and students who are not required to have any legal training could decide allegations of a most serious kind without any of the protections of the criminal law. Since the Universitys own policies state the University does not have jurisdiction over criminal acts, Lyons concludes that this removes the jurisdiction of the University in relation to allegations of a criminal offence of a sexual nature. The Judge also drew attention to other legal cases which highlight the problems of University Disciplinary Boards providing fair treatment for the accused in such matters. Those decisions outlined very real concerns about the disciplinary processes of the University and the lack of procedural fairness afforded to a student against whom allegations were made of sexual misconduct, said Lyons. This critical judgement has serious implications for our universities which have blundered into this territory in response to bullying from feminist lobby groups. It is quite extraordinary that none of the lawyers employed in the higher education sector anticipated the obvious legal pitfalls highlighted in Justice Lyons judgment particularly in the light of the 200 plus cases where American colleges have lost significant law suits over failure to protect the due process rights of accused students. Shame on our spineless university administrators for kowtowing to the tiny, noisy group of feminist activists, selling out the reputation of our universities, and exposing the entire higher education sector to the risk of law suits over unfair and illegal handing of such matters. Please help me circulate this wonderful news.

15.01.2022 Even if you didnt watch it, you would probably have seen some comments on social media about Saturdays wedding of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. What seems ...to have created most chatter was Bishop Michael Currys address (sermon) during the service. Whether you liked it or not, what has been interesting is the reaction to it. It has been polarizing - people loved it or people loathed it. The Challenge On Saturday, Bishop Michael expressly challenged us to "imagine business and commerce when love is the way" after explaining that love is more than just romantic love; its when people care. Real power is love and redemptive love has the power to transform. Imagine what that could do for your workplace! From a leadership perspective, it begs the question how people and organisations change. The simple answer about how organisations change is by the collective attitude of each of its leaders. How do we then, as leaders, change our individual attitude? Bishop Michaels address about the power of love definitely challenged all who heard it. And I would argue that it enriched those who listened to it. The Change Some may have been turned off the address by the tone of voice that it was delivered in; the unorthodox way it was delivered; the wide range in speaking volume; the unfamiliar language; the uncomfortable subject; not knowing who the speaker was; the length of it. Basically, it was the unexpected that stopped some people from listening. Bishop Michaels message required a discipline in listening. The difference between the two is that hearing is passive and listening is active. We hear so much these days that we consider most things to be noise, so much so that we can miss the beautiful sounds that are around us every day. In light of the above, leaders need to be aware how they deliver their message including, most importantly, considering the audience they are delivering it to. Moreover though, effective leaders need to be good listeners. Its a sign of a leader with high EQ. That means listening to people who disagree with you; listening to people who you dont understand; listening to people who are different from you. The Future Listening is the only way to become an evolutionary leader. Diversity around the board table, around the business owner, around the decision maker, makes for better decisions. People who do not want to change their behaviour, will not let themselves be challenged and will not listen to new ways of doing things. And that leadership style is not sustainable. A strong leader will never fear contradiction but invite it. A strong leader will never be afraid to change their mind for the better good. Leaders need to adapt and change. They need to be challenged to be confident that their way is the best way. Only then will the right decision be made. The Solution Who challenges your thinking? Who changes your mind? Who encourages you to be the best that you can. This is the power of coaching. This is how real change happens and how culture is changed for the better good. First Train currently has 2 coaching spots available at 30% off our advertised prices. For a free introductory session, contact me at [email protected] or on 0405 784071. Christopher Brooks Director, Leadership & Learning P.S. For what its worth, personally, I thought Bishop Michaels Address was utterly brilliant. It challenged my way of hearing a familiar message, moved me to think about things differently and will hopefully change my behaviour.

14.01.2022 Sounds like Wayne Dyer!

14.01.2022 See my new website: www.allanmcdougalllawyer.com.au

13.01.2022 A commendable initiative from David Freed at Minuteman Press Randwick

13.01.2022 Making business connections

10.01.2022 How hard is it for small businesses to get paid by their customers? Very, according to Australias Small Business Ombudsman. It seems we consistently have the longest delays in the world for small businesses being paid their debts. And the bad guys? According to the Ombudsman, its big businesses, with 500+ employees, taking an extra 15.5 days beyond the due date to pay. We lawyers can suggest many ways for SMEs to get debtors under control (pre-sale credit checks, wording of... contract terms, not delaying on demand for payment, enforcement etc), but actually getting the money in is the bottom line. Help though could be at hand, in the form of proposed new laws. In general, more statue laws are not necessarily something we like to see, but these ones might do some good. They will comprise a court making a "no adverse costs order:". This will mean that even if the SME must go to court to chase a debt, it wont necessarily be up for its (bigger) customers legal fees if the SME loses. Legal costs are a big disincentive for any action for debt recovery, so the publicity around these new laws sounds hopeful. However, a caution: the devil is (always) in the detail". See more

09.01.2022 Shedding crocodile tears for financiers, but its true the PPSA is more complicated than it should be

08.01.2022 A top down view from well-credentialed American. Well said Gene!

08.01.2022 My esteemed colleague keeping his eye on the SME sector

06.01.2022 Oh dear... well, as a child I was good at sketching.

06.01.2022 #Great to get the occasional seal of client approval: I had the pleasure of dealing with Allan McDougall recently from Keypoint Law. Allan was tasked with urgently reviewing some documentation in connection with a shareholders agreement. Allan acted in accordance with the scope of my instructions and turned around the job very quickly; all at a very competitive rate. Exactly what I had asked for! Thank you Allan. Stefan Lakomy, Loss Adjuster

05.01.2022 With the festive season upon us its likely that youll be attending celebratory gatherings at friends homes or even throwing a party yourself. Its probably not top of mind right now or at all, but what is the legal position should you injure yourself at a friends home, or someone injure themselves at a party youre hosting? Who, if anyone, is liable for the medical expenses that may be incurred as a result of such injuries? The standard answer is that most people would ...have taken out a home & contents insurance policy that should cover this kind of risk. So if someone claims damages from you for an injury they suffered at your party, or you want to do likewise for the injuries you suffered at a party-givers residence, then the injured party makes a demand for payment, the party-giver claims on its policy and the insurer pays up. However, thats not the end of the story: the insurer may decline to pay, citing for example the absence of negligence on the part of the insured party (ie the party-giver). Whether this is right or wrong, and whether the claim even plays out this way depends on the relevant insurance policy. Devil in the detail, as we lawyers say. However, there is help at hand. In NSW and most states the law says that an occupier (the person whose property it is) owes a duty to take reasonable care to avoid foreseeable risk of injury to other persons it invites onto the property like party guests. Under the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) the occupier is liable to compensate the injured party. Generally speaking the only defences pertain to dangerous recreational activity, which generally is the case at parties. If you are a home owner you should check your insurance policy to see if youre covered. If youre renting, your lease may put the obligation on you to insure, otherwise a guests injury would be the landlords risk. The take-away is to check your paperwork in advance, whether it be an insurance policy, a lease, or both. See more

04.01.2022 Nicoles a good operator and knows her stuff

04.01.2022 This month there has been a major NSW court decision which says that insurance companies cannot deny claims by business customers for losses incurred due to the restrictions imposed in response to the COVID-19 virus. At first glance this looks like a great relief to so many business people impacted by governments' 'pandemic' responses. However the devil is very much in the detail with this judgment. The court's decision applies only to the two insurance polices in contention.... Both referenced the long repealed Quarantine Act of 1908 to exclude from cover certain listed diseases. The listed did not, of course include COVID-19. The 2015 replacement Biosecurity Act effectively excluded COVID.-19 but was not specified in the polices. So, in this case at least, the insurers slipped up. Businesses should check the fine print before getting excited. See more

04.01.2022 A clear summary about the latest legal changes to signing your company documents post-COVID

02.01.2022 This is a simple, easy to read summary from a trusted Brisbane law firm, for those so inclined...

02.01.2022 In NSW, individuals, small companies and not-for-profit entities can sue for defamation. Companies which employ more than 10 people cannot. There are a few reasons for this, one of which is that compensation for harm to reputation should only be available to natural born persons. Another reason is that bigger companies can better look after themselves in terms of resources and access to other legal remedies such as suing for injurious falsehood. And an old, sometimes forgott...en reason is that creating an artificial person (which is what a company is) is a privilege not a right, so the privilege should not come with the other advantages of being a natural person. Despite these reasons the government is reviewing whether to give big companies the right to sue for harm to their business reputation. That is the trend here and overseas. One wonders though, where that would leave individuals such as whistleblowers; those people, usually employees, who often at great personal cost publicise corporate wrongdoings. The Corporations Act now gives formal protection to whistleblowers, but recent court cases show that this does not guarantee immunity for a truth-telling individual from mendacious litigation. See more