-
New requirements for filing family law consent orders in the FCFCOA - FED
A Word version of proposed consent orders for family law matters in Division 2 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia must now be lodged with an application for consent orders.
From 31 October 2025 the following documents are required when filing an Application for Consent Orders on the Commonwealth Courts Portal:
- The Proposed orders signed by all parties on each page in PDF format;
- The Proposed orders in an unsigned Word document (.docx) version;
- The Application for consent orders form; and
- Any other documents required having regard to the orders sought.
Practitioners must confirm by checking a box in the form that the text contained within the Word document is identical to the text in the signed PDF submitted with the application.
The commentary on Consent orders has been updated in the By Lawyers Family Law – Property Settlement and Family Law – Children guides.
-
Federal Court rejects annualised reconciliation for salaried employees - FED
In Fair Work Ombudsman v Woolworths Group Limited; Fair Work Ombudsman v Coles Supermarkets Australia Pty Ltd; Baker v Woolworths Group Limited; Pabalan v Coles Supermarkets Australia Pty Ltd [2025] FCA 1092, the Federal Court ruled that employers cannot use overpayments in one pay period to offset underpayments in another when paying annualised or all-in salaries under modern awards.
The decision rejected the long-standing practice of annualised reconciliation for salaried employees, in which excess payments in quiet weeks were used to cover shortfalls in busier ones.
The court said it is not sufficient that an employee is better off overall by their annualised salary compared to the award entitlements. Each pay period must meet all award entitlements – ordinary hours, overtime, allowances, penalties, and loadings – within that period.
The court emphasised that, under s 557C of the Fair Work Act 2009, the employer bears the full evidentiary burden if records of an employee's hours worked, breaks, or allowances are missing or incomplete. Reliance on a payroll system alone is not sufficient if it does not capture the actual hours worked.
Publication updates
A case summary and link have been added to 101 Employment Law Answers reference manual. The By Lawyers Employment Law (FED) guide has been updated in line with the decision, including the By Lawyers Standard Individual Employment Agreement precedent.
-
AML/CTF changes impact law firms from March 2026 - FED
Anti-Money Laundering and Counter Terrorism Financing (AML/CTF)
Overview of the changes
On 31 March 2026, law firms providing designated services will become subject to AML/CTF regulation.
By 1 July 2026, regulated law firms must:
- have an AML/CTF program;
- have an AML/CTF compliance officer;
- train staff on their program, internal processes, and ML/TF risks; and
- be ready to comply with the Act's requirements and report suspicious matters.
Key aspects of compliance include client identification and record-keeping, which law firms already systematise as part of their existing procedures. Integrating those procedures into an AML/CTF plan means law firms can ease the burden of compliance.
For LEAP users, LEAP's partner InfoTrack is leading the development of a complete AML/CTF Compliance Centre designed specifically for the Australian regime. This solution will integrate seamlessly into LEAP, ensuring that compliance becomes a natural part of the firm's existing workflow.
Legislation
The Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Amendment Act 2024 (Cth) (the amending Act) expands the categories of reporting entities under the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act 2006 (the Act) to include:
- real estate professionals;
- dealers in precious metals and precious stones; and
- professional service providers, including lawyers, conveyancers, accountants, and trust and company service providers.
These new participants are referred to as tranche 2 entities.
The main provisions of the amending Act commence on 31 March 2026.
The new Anti Money Laundering and Counter Terrorism Financing Rules 2025 (the Rules) also commence on 31 March 2026.
AUSTRAC regulation
Tranche 2 entities must enrol as reporting entities with the regulator, the Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre (AUSTRAC) by 1 July 2026.
Enrolment opens 31 March 2026.
AUSTRAC has a dual role as Australia’s AML/CTF regulator and financial intelligence unit. Its mandate is to disrupt money laundering, terrorism financing, and other serious crimes.
AUSTRAC ensures regulated businesses comply with their obligations under the Act, including the obligation to have systems and controls that manage ML/TF risks.
Designated services
Only law firms providing designated services are regulated.
Designated services include:
- assisting clients to buy, sell, or transfer real estate;
- assisting clients to create, buy, sell, transfer, or restructure a legal arrangement;
- receiving, holding, controlling, or managing client funds or property;
- appointing a person, or acting as, a director or secretary of a company, power of attorney for a legal arrangement or body corporate, partner in a partnership, trustee of an express trust or any equivalent position;
- appointing a person, or acting as, a nominee shareholder of a legal arrangement or body corporate;
- providing a registered office address or principal place of business for a legal arrangement or body corporate;
- handling a person’s money, accounts, securities, virtual assets or other property to help a person plan or execute a transaction.
A legal arrangement includes an express trust, partnership, joint venture, unincorporated association, or other legal arrangement.
Law firms can determine if they are a tranche 2 entity by using AUSTRAC's online tool: Check if you’ll be regulated.
What regulated law firms need to do before 31 March 2026
If regulated, firms need to start preparing to implement an AML/CTF program by:
- conducting a risk assessment;
- thinking about how to monitor transactions;
- preparing policies;
- subscribing to receive updates from AUSTRAC; and
- being ready to enrol from 31 March 2026.
See AML/CTF Reform on the AUSTRAC website for more information, including toolkits specifically designed for small/medium firms.
What regulated law firms need to do before 1 July 2026
AUSTRAC expects tranche 2 entities by 1 July 2026 to:
- be enrolled as a reporting entity;
- have an AML/CTF program either of their own design or using an AUSTRAC starter program available from December 2025;
- designate at least 1 senior manager to be responsible for approving their AML/CTF program;
- appoint an AML/CTF compliance officer, being an appropriate person in management;
- train their staff on the program and their internal policies and processes; and
- be ready to comply with their obligations under the Act.
What regulated law firms need to do after 1 July 2026
From 1 July 2026 regulated firms are required to:
- undertake an ML/TF risk assessment on their firm and keep it up to date;
- keep their AML/CTF policies and procedures up to date;
- conduct customer due diligence (CDD) on every client and for every new matter;
- comply with reporting requirements; and
- maintain appropriate records.
Customer due diligence
Initial customer due diligence requirements include:
- if the customer is an individual, taking reasonable steps to establish they are who they claim to be, including if they are a politically exposed person as defined in the Act;
- identifying the customer's ML/TF risk;
- collecting information about the customer appropriate to ML/TF risk; and
- verifying the customer information using independent and reliable data that is appropriate to ML/TF risk.
Ongoing CDD requires regulated firms to monitor their clients to appropriately identify, assess, manage, and mitigate the ML/TF risks they may reasonably face in providing services. This includes reviewing and updating client information, and monitoring for unusual transactions and behaviours that may trigger a requirement to lodge a report.
Simplified CDD is permissible in certain circumstances if the client's ML/TF risk is low and other requirements are met.
Enhanced CDD must be applied in certain prescribed, high-risk circumstances. Regulated firms need to collect and verify additional information relevant to mitigating the identified higher risk and be reasonably satisfied that they know and understand their client's identity. See Enhanced customer due diligence (ECDD) program on the AUSTRAC website.
Policies
Regulated firms must have internal policies for AML/CTF that cover:
- how the firm will identify and report on the ML/CT risks it faces;
- designating an AML/CTF compliance officer;
- designating a senior manager responsible for approving any changes to the ML/TF risk assessment or AML/CTF policies;
- how the firm will undertake due diligence on staff whose role may allow them to facilitate serious financial crimes or whose role is relevant to AML/CTF compliance;
- how the firm will provide risk awareness and management training to staff;
- how, and when, to conduct an independent review of its AML/CTF program; and
- any other matters provided for in the Rules.
Reporting
Regulated firms are required to report certain transactions and suspicious activities to AUSTRAC. Reports that may be required include:
- Suspicious matter reports, if the firms suspects on reasonable grounds that a person is not who they claim to be, or that a matter is linked to criminal activity or the proceeds of crime. See Suspicious matter reports on the AUSTRAC website for more information.
- Threshold transaction reports for individual physical currency transactions of $10,000 or more.
- International value transfer service reports for certain international transfers.
- Cross-border movement reports if carrying physical currency or bearer negotiable instruments valued at A$10,000 or higher into or out of Australia.
- Annual compliance reports.
Privileged information
Section 242 of the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act 2006 already provides that it does not affect the law relating to legal professional privilege. The amending Act provides stronger protections for the disclosure of information or documents that are subject to legal professional privilege, reflecting the fact that lawyers are now included in the regime.
See Schedule 4 and Clear protections for legal professional privilege on the AUSTRAC website.
Offence
The amending Act creates a new offence of 'tipping off', intended to prevent a reporting entity from disclosing information to their client, such as the fact that they have made a suspicious matter report, if it could reasonably prejudice an investigation.
See Schedule 5 of the amending Act and Tipping off on the AUSTRAC website.
Enforcement
After 1 July 2026, AUSTRAC will conduct enforcement operations against tranche 2 entities that:
- wilfully ignore the obligation to enrol; or
- are complicit with, or wilfully blind to, money laundering activities.
Guidance
See the following pages on the AUSTRAC website:
Publication updates
By Lawyers publications will be amended as required to account for these changes. Specific amendments will include First steps in all commentaries, the Conveyancing guides in each jurisdiction, and the Practice Management guide.
-
Monitoring device conditions for DV offenders - QLD
The Domestic and Family Violence Protection Act 2012 has been amended to insert a new Part 3 Subdivision 3 that gives the court the power, when making or varying a domestic violence order, to impose a monitoring device condition on an adult offender for as long as the court thinks necessary if:
- it is necessary or desirable to protect a person from domestic violence or a child from being exposed to it; and
- the respondent has been charged with or convicted of a domestic violence offence or has a history of charges for domestic violence offences.
When deciding whether to impose the condition, the court must consider the personal circumstances of the offender, the location of the residence, their living arrangements, their ability to charge and maintain the device, and any views of the aggrieved person.
The aggrieved person may also be given a safety device, which is an electronic device designed to alert them to potential risks posed by the individual who has been fitted with a monitoring device.
Special provisions in the Act and the Domestic and Family Violence Protection Regulation 2023 prescribe how the information obtained from the monitoring device must be stored, may be shared, and can be use.
The By Lawyers Domestic Violence Order (QLD) guide has been updated accordingly.
-
Supreme Court - Accuracy of references - QLD
The Supreme Court of Queensland has issued a new Practice Direction Number 5 of 2025 – Accuracy of References in Submissions addressing the risks associated with the use of generative artificial intelligence tools when drafting submissions to the court.
These risks are said to include the potential to:
- mislead the court and the other parties;
- cause delay and wasted costs;
- undermine the integrity of the court’s processes, and
- harm public confidence in the administration of justice.
The Practice Direction requires the identification of the person responsible for the submissions by name to ensure that they are properly checked for accuracy.
It is not sufficient that a law firm is named; an individual legal practitioner must take responsibility for the document.
The direction imposes an obligation on the responsible person to:
- verify the accuracy and relevance of any references to legislation, authorities, or other sources relied on in submissions; and
- ensure that the submissions reflect their judgment of the proper discharge of their professional and ethical obligations.
By placing their name on the document or by making oral submissions, the legal practitioner confirms to the court that they have performed this obligation.
Submissions that cite non-existent cases, legislation, or other material may lead to the legal practitioner who is responsible being referred to the Legal Services Commissioner for investigation, or being required to show cause why a personal costs order should not be made against them.
The By Lawyers Supreme Court Civil (QLD) publication has been updated accordingly.
- Civil rules amended in the Magistrates Court - SA
Two small but important changes to the Uniform Civil Rules 2020 took effect from 1 October 2025 under the Uniform Civil (No 15) Amendment Rules 2025.
Inactive List abolished
Previously, when a claim was filed in the Magistrates Court and no application for an extension of time made, or defence filed, or default judgment sought, within 6 months, the proceeding was entered into the list of inactive cases. If no action was taken within 1 further month, it was entered into the inactive list. After 2 months with no further action by any party, the claim would be dismissed.
The new r 64.3 streamlines that process. If after 5 months of filing a claim:
- no defence has been filed;
- no application for default judgment made;
- no moratorium sought;
- no court-ordered extension for service of the claim or the filing of a defence granted;
then the court notifies the applicant and the claim is dismissed after 4 months if no action is taken, with a right to seek reinstatement under r 64.4 by way of interlocutory application and supporting affidavit.
Moratoria
The new r 64.5(5) confirms that when an applicant elects to place a claim under a moratorium, it operates with respect to the entire claim and all parties. It is not possible to place some of the parties or only part of the claim under a moratorium.
Publication updates
The By Lawyers guide Magistrates Court Civil (SA) has been updated accordingly.
- Bail amendments - unacceptable risk test - VIC
Another tranche of the Bail Further Amendment Act 2025 commenced on 1 October 2025. It inserts a new provision in the Bail Act affecting the application of the test for whether there is an unacceptable risk that the accused will commit further offences if granted bail.
Existing sections 4D and 4E of the Bail Act respectively set out when the unacceptable risk test applies, and provide that bail must be refused if there is an unacceptable risk.
A new s 4F applies if the accused is charged with, and already on bail for, any of the following indictable offences under the following sections of the Crimes Act 1958:
- armed robbery: s 75A;
- aggravated burglary: s 77;
- home invasion: s 77A;
- aggravated home invasion: s 77B;
- carjacking: s 79; and
- aggravated carjacking: s 79A.
If so, the court must be satisfied to a high degree of probability that the person will not commit further offences. As with s 4E, the prosecution bears the burden of satisfying the court that a risk is unacceptable.
The By Lawyers Magistrates’ Court – Criminal (VIC) guide has been updated accordingly.
Knowledge Base
