<!--The Official Report of Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) of the Legislative Council and the House of Assembly of the Parliament of South Australia are covered by parliamentary privilege. Republication by others is not afforded the same protection and may result in exposure to legal liability if the material is defamatory. You may copy and make use of excerpts of proceedings where (1) you attribute the Parliament as the source, (2) you assume the risk of liability if the manner of your use is defamatory, (3) you do not use the material for the purpose of advertising, satire or ridicule, or to misrepresent members of Parliament, and (4) your use of the extracts is fair, accurate and not misleading. Copyright in the Official Report of Parliamentary Debates is held by the Attorney-General of South Australia.-->
<hansard id="" tocId="" xml:lang="EN-AU" schemaVersion="1.0" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xml="http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2007/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="hansard_1_0.xsd">
  <name>House of Assembly</name>
  <date date="2014-05-21" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-Third Parliament, First Session (53-1)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>53</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>1</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>House of Assembly</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="279" />
  <endPage num="350" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding>
    <name>Bills</name>
    <text id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000009">
      <heading>Bills</heading>
    </text>
    <subject>
      <name>Administration and Probate (Removal of Requirement for Surety) Amendment Bill</name>
      <bills>
        <bill id="r3612">
          <name>Administration and Probate (Removal of Requirement for Surety) Amendment Bill</name>
        </bill>
      </bills>
      <text id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000010">
        <heading>Administration and Probate (Removal of Requirement for Surety) Amendment Bill</heading>
      </text>
      <subproceeding>
        <name>Second Reading</name>
        <text id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000011">
          <heading>Second Reading</heading>
        </text>
        <talker role="member" id="3117" kind="speech">
          <name>The Hon. L.W.K. BIGNELL</name>
          <house>House of Assembly</house>
          <electorate id="">Mawson</electorate>
          <portfolios>
            <portfolio id="">
              <name>Minister for Agriculture</name>
            </portfolio>
            <portfolio id="">
              <name>Minister for Forests</name>
            </portfolio>
            <portfolio id="">
              <name>Minister for Tourism</name>
            </portfolio>
            <portfolio id="">
              <name>Minister for Recreation and Sport</name>
            </portfolio>
            <portfolio id="">
              <name>Minister for Racing</name>
            </portfolio>
          </portfolios>
          <startTime time="2014-05-21T11:02:59" />
          <text id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000012">
            <timeStamp time="2014-05-21T11:02:59" />
            <by role="member" id="3117">The Hon. L.W.K. BIGNELL (Mawson—Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, Minister for Forests, Minister for Tourism, Minister for Recreation and Sport, Minister for Racing) (11:02):</by>  I move:</text>
          <text id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000013">
            <inserted>That this bill be now read a second time.</inserted>
          </text>
          <text continued="true" id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000014">I seek leave to have the second reading explanation inserted in <term>Hansard </term>without my reading it.</text>
          <text id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000015">Leave granted.</text>
          <text id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000016">
            <inserted>This Bill amends the <term>Administration and Probate Act 1919</term> to implement the first set of reforms based upon the recommendations of the South Australian Law Reform Institute in the Final Report 2: Sureties' guarantees for letters of administration.</inserted>
          </text>
          <text id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000017">
            <inserted>This Bill needs little explanation. It repeals sections 18 and 31 of the Act and amends sections 58, 66 and 67 of the Act, removing from the Act the requirements for, and references to, sureties' guarantees.</inserted>
          </text>
          <text id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000018">
            <inserted>In 2011 the South Australian Law Reform Institute was asked to identify the areas of succession law that were most in need of review, to conduct a review of each of those areas and to recommend reforms. The Institute's Advisory Board identified seven topics for review and established a Succession Law Reference Group. One of the topics was whether the South Australian statutory requirement for sureties' guarantees to be provided before some intestate estates can be administered should be retained or modified. This requirement has been criticised as obstructing the prompt administration of deceased estates.</inserted>
          </text>
          <text id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000019">
            <inserted>An Issues Paper, released by the Institute in 2013, explored the concerns about the requirement for sureties' guarantees. Submissions on the Issues Paper overwhelmingly supported the removal of this redundant requirement for sureties' guarantees because of—dad</inserted>
          </text>
          <text id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000020">
            <item sublevel="1" bullet="true">
              <inserted>the unnecessary cost and time involved; and</inserted>
            </item>
          </text>
          <text id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000021">
            <item sublevel="1" bullet="true">
              <inserted>the difficulty in obtaining a surety; and</inserted>
            </item>
          </text>
          <text id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000022">
            <item sublevel="1" bullet="true">
              <inserted>the fact there is only infrequent recourse to sureties; and</inserted>
            </item>
          </text>
          <text id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000023">
            <item sublevel="1" bullet="true">
              <inserted>the degree of protection afforded; and</inserted>
            </item>
          </text>
          <text id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000024">
            <item sublevel="1" bullet="true">
              <inserted>the fact that they are required only when an administrator is appointed, and not when there is an executor.</inserted>
            </item>
          </text>
          <text continued="true" id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000025">
            <inserted>Laws requiring a form of security against maladministration in South Australia were first enacted in the <term>Administration and Probate Act 1919</term>, which required every applicant to provide an administration bond. The Act was amended in 1978, following recommendations by the South Australian Law Reform Committee, and further amended in 2003 to replace the requirement for an administration bond with a requirement for a guarantee. The 2003 amendment also permitted the Supreme Court to dispense with the requirement for a surety guarantee where satisfied that it is 'beneficial or expedient to do so', require a further or additional guarantee or reduce the amount guaranteed. That has remained the current law.</inserted>
          </text>
          <page num="280" />
          <text id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000026">
            <inserted>In practice the Court, in almost all cases, takes advantage of the amendment and either dispenses with the requirement altogether or reduces the amount of the guarantee and sometimes appoints an additional administrator. There is no evidence that in South Australia anyone has suffered loss from an administrator acting wrongly or that anyone has enforced a surety's guarantee.</inserted>
          </text>
          <text id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000027">
            <inserted>Although there are convincing arguments for doing more than simply removing the requirements for sureties' guarantees, the Institute recommends that in the interests of effective administration of deceased estates, this reform should not wait upon the preparation of other amendments for reform which are more complex and will need careful attention to detail.</inserted>
          </text>
          <text id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000028">
            <inserted>I commend the Bill to Members.</inserted>
          </text>
          <bookmark>Explanation of Clauses</bookmark>
          <text id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000029">
            <inserted>
              <subheading>Explanation of Clauses</subheading>
            </inserted>
          </text>
          <text id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000030">
            <item>
              <inserted>Part 1—Preliminary</inserted>
            </item>
          </text>
          <text id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000031">
            <item>
              <inserted>1—Short title</inserted>
            </item>
          </text>
          <text id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000032">
            <item>
              <inserted>2—Commencement</inserted>
            </item>
          </text>
          <text id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000033">
            <item>
              <inserted>3—Amendment provisions</inserted>
            </item>
          </text>
          <text id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000034">
            <inserted>These clauses are formal.</inserted>
          </text>
          <text id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000035">
            <item>
              <inserted>Part 2—Amendment of <term>Administration and Probate Act 1919</term></inserted>
            </item>
          </text>
          <text id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000036">
            <item>
              <inserted>4—Repeal of section 18</inserted>
            </item>
          </text>
          <text id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000037">
            <inserted>This clause repeals section 18 of the principal Act with the effect of removing the requirement for a surety to be provided before the sealing of administration under section 17.</inserted>
          </text>
          <text continued="true" id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000038">
            <inserted>5—Repeal of section 31</inserted>
          </text>
          <text id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000039">
            <inserted>This clause repeals section 31 of the principal Act with the effect of removing the requirement for a person to whom administration is granted to provide a surety in certain circumstances.</inserted>
          </text>
          <text continued="true" id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000040">
            <inserted>6—Amendment of section 58—Proceedings to compel account</inserted>
          </text>
          <text id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000041">
            <inserted>This clause deletes section 58(4) of the principal Act and is consequential on the repeal of sections 18 and 31.</inserted>
          </text>
          <text continued="true" id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000042">
            <inserted>7—Amendment of section 66—Effect of delivery etc to Public Trustee</inserted>
          </text>
          <text id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000043">
            <inserted>This clause removes a reference to 'surety' and is consequential on the repeal of sections 18 and 31.</inserted>
          </text>
          <text continued="true" id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000044">
            <inserted>8—Amendment of section 67—Judge may dispense wholly or partially with compliance with section 65</inserted>
          </text>
          <text id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000045">
            <inserted>This clause removes a reference to 'surety' and is consequential on the repeal of sections 18 and 31.</inserted>
          </text>
          <text id="201405214884d886c37d42ab80000046">Debate adjourned on motion of Mr Gardner.</text>
        </talker>
      </subproceeding>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>