Bills Digest No. 75 2003-04
Treasury Legislation Amendment (Professional Standards)
Bill 2003
WARNING:
This Digest was prepared for debate. It reflects the legislation as
introduced and does not canvass subsequent amendments. This Digest
does not have any official legal status. Other sources should be
consulted to determine the subsequent official status of the
Bill.
CONTENTS
Passage History
Purpose
Background
Main Provisions
Concluding Comments
Endnotes
Contact Officer & Copyright Details
Passage History
Treasury Legislation
Amendment (Professional Standards) Bill
2003
Date Introduced:
4 December 2003
House: House of Representatives
Portfolio: Treasury
Commencement:
Royal
Assent
The purpose of the Bill is to amend the
Trade Practices Act 1974, the Australian Securities
and Investments Commission Act 2001 and the Corporations
Act 2001 to align these Commonwealth laws with State laws on
professional standards. The relevant State laws limit the civil
liability of professionals and others while still maintaining
appropriate protection for consumers of professional services
through such measures as compulsory insurance cover and complaints
procedures.
Background
The Explanatory Memorandum to the
Bill points out that the Insurance Council of Australia has stated
that professional standards legislation (PSL) is one of four
pillars to improve the availability and affordability of
professional indemnity insurance.(1) PSL, which is
enacted at the State and Territory level, aims to achieve this
by:
-
the creation of schemes to cap the civil liability of
professionals in certain circumstances
-
the enhancement
of professional standards by way of professional education and
other strategies, including risk management
-
consumer protection (e.g. by compulsory insurance cover and
complaints procedures), and
-
the creation of schemes for supervision and disciplinary
procedures carried out by relevant professional bodies.
The purpose of PSL is to stop large civil
claims being made as a result of specified types of professional
occupational activities.
PSL attempts to provide a degree of certainty
to both the professionals and the consumers of professional
services. A legislative response is seen as a means of reducing
pressure for increasing insurance premiums and reducing any
potential for an exodus of professionals from some sectors. PSL
also helps in combating tactics by some professionals who may
alienate their assets so as to frustrate claimants thus avoiding
financial loss or who may even 'go bare' (i.e. fail to take out
professional insurance).
Specific professional standards legislation
(PSL) has been operating in New South Wales and Western Australia.
These statutes are the Professional Standards Act (NSW)
1994 and the Professional Standards Act (WA) 1997,
respectively. New legislation was enacted in Victoria on 2 December
2003 (Professional Standards Act (VIC)
2003). The Australian Capital Territory will place PSL
legislation on its 2004 legislative program.
At the time of preparation of this Bills
Digest, PSL was under consideration or development in the other
Australian States and the Northern Territory.(2)
This Bill proposes a scheme whereby it adapts
the PSL legislation arrangement at the State and Territory level
and applies the arrangement to limit civil liability for misleading
and deceptive conduct under the Commonwealth's Trade Practices
Act 1974, the Australian Securities and Investments
Commission Act 2001 and the Corporations Act
2001.
The Explanatory Memorandum also
recognises that there is a constitutional issue that the
Commonwealth must observe when it comes to making laws that may
been seen to 'prefer' a particular State. Section 99 of the
Constitution states:
The Commonwealth shall not, by any law or
regulation of trade, commerce, or revenue, give preference to one
State or any part thereof over another State or any part
thereof.
The task of selecting a PSL scheme (or
schemes) for utilisation in connection with a Commonwealth law may
present an initial challenge because, as noted above, there are, as
yet, only a limited number of States with PSL schemes and the most
recently enacted statutory scheme (Victoria) has diverged from the
schemes in New South Wales and Western Australia (discussed below
under 'Press Commentary').
The proposed Commonwealth scheme will be
implemented by Regulations that will prescribe the appropriate PSL
scheme or schemes. The Commonwealth scheme may modify the relevant
PSL. The Regulations have not yet been issued and the content of
the relevant PSL for the Commonwealth laws covered by this Bill is
not yet known. It is likely that the Commonwealth regulations will
prescribe a 'one size fits all' model for the Commonwealth's
jurisdiction.
The Government's stated reasons for the
proposed changes to the law, as contained in the Bill, are stated
in the Explanatory Memorandum as follows:
In the interests of maintaining consistency, which
will lead to the best outcome for all Australians in terms of
accessing more affordable professional services and maintaining
consistency of law reforms across Australia, it is imperative that
no jurisdiction deviate from the nationally agreed position.
The amendments made by this Bill will establish a
structure under which the Commonwealth, by prescribing State PSL
schemes, can support PSL by allowing liability under the relevant
Commonwealth legislative provisions to be capped.(3)
Liability will be limited under the
Commonwealth laws (for misleading and deceptive conduct) only when
the State PSL schemes are prescribed (by Regulations) under the
relevant provisions in those Commonwealth laws.
The PSL legislation for New South Wales,
Western Australia and Victoria establishes an 11 member
Professional Standards Council in each State, respectively. Each
State Act specifies that the members of the Council are appointed
by the State Minister and those persons shall have 'such
experience, skills and qualifications as the Minister considers
appropriate to enable them to make a contribution to the work of
the Council.'(4)
Using the existing example of PSL in New South
Wales, the Professional Standards Council (PSC-NSW) is an
independent body appointed by the NSW Attorney General. The PSC-NSW
is responsible for:
-
determining
applications by occupational associations for professional
standards schemes
-
advising the Attorney General about occupational standards
-
monitoring compliance by occupational associations with their risk
management strategies, and
-
publishing information and conducting forums to assist occupational
associations to improve the standards of their
members.(5)
Professionals who are involved in professional
standards schemes through the PSC-NSW scheme are eligible to use
and display the trade mark Cover of Excellence term and
logo. A licence to use the trade mark is obtained through
participating occupational associations. The schemes are legally
binding arrangements which aim to improve professional standards.
The trade mark conveys values and traits associated with
professional conduct including:
-
competence
-
accountability
-
quality
-
ethical behaviour and practices
-
integrity
and honesty
-
responsiveness to consumers, and
-
acting in the
public interest.(6)
In a media release on 19 September 2003, the
PSC-NSW (which was meeting in Perth to release a compliance
framework for the NSW and WA professions) noted:
Insurance Ministers from across the country in
August agreed to establish PSL in all Australian States and
Territories. WA and NSW lead the way in developing changes to PSL
as part of an approach to have nationally consistent legislation
across Australia.(7)
Of particular relevance is the press coverage
of the different approach taken in the recently enacted Victorian
Professional Standards Act (VIC) 2003,
in exempting a capped liability for a professional breach of
fiduciary duty. Both the NSW PSL and WA PSL exclude caps
on damages arising from:
-
death or personal injury to a person
-
negligence or other fault of a legal practitioner acting for a
client in a personal injury claim
-
a breach of
trust
-
fraud or dishonesty, or
-
certain
proceedings relating to the transfer of land.
The Victorian legislation adds an additional
category of a 'breach of trust or of fiduciary
duty'.(8) Broadly stated, a fiduciary duty requires
a person to act in good faith for the benefit of another and not to
profit from the relationship (unless permitted). This type of duty
involves avoiding a conflict of interest. Chris Merritt in the
Australian Financial Review of 28 November 2003 reported
that the Victorian Government has received legal advice to the
effect:
that fiduciary duties differ from the professional
duties and obligations that a professional person may owe a client
as part of a fiduciary relationship.
It therefore attracts different legal remedies
from those arising from a breach of contract or negligence.
The advice says not all breaches of duty owed by a
professional to a client are breaches of fiduciary duty even though
there may be a fiduciary relationship between the two
parties.(9)
Chris Merritt notes that Victoria argues that its
approach is consistent with the High Court decision in Breen
v Williams (1995-1996).(10) That court
decision concerned an unsuccessful application by Ms Breen, a
patient of a plastic surgeon (Dr Williams), for access to the
surgeon's medical records on the patient. The patient was
interested in joining a US class action over allegedly defective
implants. As a precaution, the surgeon offered to provide access to
his records on the condition that he was given a legal release from
any claim arising from his treatment of the patient. Ms Breen
challenged the surgeon's decision. Justices Gaudron and McHugh
stated:
In the present case, it is impossible to identify
any conflict of interest, unauthorised profit or any loss resulting
from any breach of duty.
In the present case, there was no breach of
fiduciary duty in conditional denial of access because there was no
pre-existing duty on the part of Dr Williams to give access to the
records.
It is also impossible to identify any profit that
Dr Williams may have derived from the relationship beyond the
payment of his professional fees. Nor is the case one where Dr
Williams seeks to make or has made a profit from confidential
information that he obtained in the course of his relationship with
Mr Breen.(11)
Victoria has made a refinement to its PSL and
appears to take the view that a breach of fiduciary duty is
unlikely to arise in the case of professional occupational
negligence and that it would be contrary to the interests of
consumers to have such damages for a breach of fiduciary duty
reduced in terms of a payout. A contrary view from the Law
Institute of Victoria warns that unless the Victorian PSL is
aligned with NSW PSL and WA PSL the national capping scheme will be
undermined.(12)
In a practical sense, the proposed amendments
made by this Bill are relatively straightforward and brief.
Relevant parts of Commonwealth laws dealing with civil liability
for misleading or deceptive conduct will be subject to PSL capping
to align them with the proposed national scheme. The operative
mechanism (based on State PSL schemes) to be used by the
Commonwealth to cap liability will be prescribed by way of
Commonwealth Regulations.
The Explanatory Memorandum to the
Bill advises that civil liability under the Commonwealth laws is
not limited generally (as noted above, the Bill specifically
focuses on the issue of contraventions by way of misleading and
deceptive conduct). The Regulations will specify when specific
limitations apply and the Regulations may, if necessary, modify the
effect of the State PSL scheme to ensure that the interests of
consumers are protected. The Explanatory Memorandum says
that no State scheme will be given a preference over
another.(13)
Bill's Reference to 'Choice of Law
Rules'
The proposed amendments in the Bill repeat the
term 'choice of law rules operate in relation to the
contravention in the same way as they operate in relation to a
tort'. This is simply a statement of the existing application
in each State and Territory of Australia of their local statute
that requires that State or Territory to recognise a limitation law
(e.g. a time limit for the commencement of proceedings) of another
State or Territory or of New Zealand as part of the substantive law
of that place, when relevant. The main factor to consider is where
the tort (i.e. negligent act) occurred, irrespective of where the
court action is taken. These rules are necessary because variations
in limitation periods between jurisdictions can create
anomalies.
Items 1 to 3
include the insertion of a new section 12GN to
apply a prescribed PSL scheme to a contravention of existing
section 12DA (which deals with misleading or deceptive conduct in
relation to financial services) under the Australian Securities
and Investments Commission Act 2001. Depending on the
particular claim, the effect of the proposed amendments is to limit
liability and this may limit the amount of damages recovered in
certain circumstances.
Items 4 to 8
include the insertion of a proposed new section
1044B at the end of Division 4 of Part 7.10 of the
Corporations Act 2001. Existing Part 7.10 deals with
market misconduct and other misconduct relating to financial
products and financial services. The effect of the proposed
amendments is to limit liability and this may limit the amount of
damages a person may recover for misleading or deceptive conduct in
relation to financial services. The proposed new section
1044B allows a PSL scheme to be prescribed.
Items 9 to
11 include the insertion of a proposed new
section 87AB in the Trade Practices Act 1974. The
proposed new section allows a PSL scheme to be prescribed and
applied to damages claims for misleading and deceptive conduct
under section 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974.
Depending on the particular claim, the effect of the proposed
amendments is to limit liability and this may limit the amount of
damages recovered in certain circumstances.
Section 52 of the Trade Practices Act
1974 is the main provision that deals with misleading or
deceptive conduct. It is noted that the proposed amendments
specifically identify section 52 only and do not specify other
sections in Part V (consumer protection), such as sections 53
(false or misleading representations). Section 53 is an offence
provision that supports section 52 but it is a separate section to
section 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974.
This Bill
forms part of the collective response of the Commonwealth,
the States and Territories to curb large damages payouts and to
ensure adequate protection is in place for those who rely on
professional indemnity insurance cover. The trade-off for consumers
and the community in capping the liability of professionals is the
implementation of statutory schemes that aim to improve
professional standards. Improvements in professional standards will
be achieved through compulsory insurance cover, risk management
strategies, professional education and complaints and disciplinary
mechanisms.
The success of PSL reforms will depend
to a large extent on consistent legislation in all jurisdictions
and firm regulation of professionals by their professional
associations. Already there is a divergence in the State PSL
schemes with the recently enacted Victorian statute.
Small shareholders and investors are
reported to be worried about the liability cap. The Australian
Shareholders Association president, John
Curry, is reported as saying that investors
should be able to pursue accountants, financial planners or
auditors for the full amount of losses caused by any negligent
work.(14)
There is no doubt that ensuring there is
an effective national professional standards scheme with capped
liability is a challenge of some complexity. The fact that the full
measure of loss in a particular case is not recovered from a
professional arguably means that some one loses out. This is also
likely to be of concern to large businesses that rely upon external
professionals. If the large firm faces a liability cap it may have
to absorb any residual loss which, in turn, is likely to reduce
company returns to shareholders and investors.
Adequate community consultation on
this Bill is desirable and the comments
expressed in the Minister's Second Reading speech to the House of
Representatives on 4 December 2003, on
this point, are noted.(15)
-
Explanatory Memorandum, Treasury Legislation Amendment
(Professional Standards) Bill 2003, p. 2. The other three pillars
are:
-
amendments to
section 54 of the Insurance Contracts Act 1984
-
implementing
proportionate liability for economic loss, and
-
amending the Trade Practices Act 1974.
-
The Northern Territory Treasurer, the Hon S. Stirling MLA, has
reported to the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly on 19
August 2003 following an Insurance Ministers Council meeting held
on 6 August 2003 in Adelaide that the Northern Territory 'will
continue to work with the states and Commonwealth to make the
reforms necessary to contain insurance costs': see Northern
Territory Legislative Assembly, 'Ministerial Report Insurance Law
Reform', Hansard, 19 August 2003, Parliamentary Record No:
14.
-
Explanatory Memorandum, Treasury Legislation Amendment
(Professional Standards) Bill 2003, p. 2.
-
Professional Standards Act 1994 (NSW), s. 40:
Professional Standards Act 1997 (WA), s. 9:
Professional Standards Act 2003 (VIC), s. 43.
-
See the web site for the New South Wales Professional Standards
Council at: http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/psc.nsf/pages/whatwedoindex1
.
-
The trade term and logo are found on the web site for the New
South Wales Professional Standards Council at: http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/psc.nsf/pages/cover_1
.
-
'New Program to improve compliance with standards', Media
Release, New South Wales Professional Standards Council, 19
September 2003.
-
Paragraph 5(1)(c) of the Professional Standards Act
(VIC) 2003.
-
Chris Merritt, 'Victoria defends exemption clause',
Australian Financial Review, 28 November 2003, p. 55.
-
Breen v Williams (1995 1996) 186 CLR 71.
-
Breen v Williams (1995 1996) 186 CLR 71 at pp.
108 109.
-
Chris Merritt, 'State puts national liability cap at risk',
Australian Financial Review, 28 November 2003, p. 55.
-
Explanatory Memorandum, Treasury Legislation Amendment
(Professional Standards) Bill 2003, p. 2.
-
Fiona Buffini, 'Liability cap worries investors', Australian
Financial Review, 11 August 2003, p. 5.
-
Hon Ross Cameron, Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer,
Second Reading speech, Treasury Legislation Amendment
(Professional Standards) Bill 2003, House of Representatives,
Debates, 4 December 2003, p. 23326.
Brendan Bailey
18 February 2004
Bills Digest Service
Information and Research Services
This paper has been prepared for general distribution to
Senators and Members of the Australian Parliament. While great care
is taken to ensure that the paper is accurate and balanced, the
paper is written using information publicly available at the time
of production. The views expressed are those of the author and
should not be attributed to the Information and Research Services
(IRS). Advice on legislation or legal policy issues contained in
this paper is provided for use in parliamentary debate and for
related parliamentary purposes. This paper is not professional
legal opinion. Readers are reminded that the paper is not an
official parliamentary or Australian government document.
IRS staff are available to discuss the paper's
contents with Senators and Members and their staff but not with
members of the public.
ISSN 1328-8091
© Commonwealth of Australia 2004
Except to the extent of the uses permitted under the
Copyright Act 1968, no part of this publication may be
reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, including
information storage and retrieval systems, without the prior
written consent of the Parliamentary Library, other than by Members
of the Australian Parliament in the course of their official
duties.
Published by the Parliamentary Library, 2004.
Back to top