As of 21 March 2021, the Corporations (Coronavirus Economic Response) Determination (No 3) 2020 (Cth) (Determination) lapsed because it reached the end of its six (6) month period as prescribed by section 9(3) of the Determination. This means that the ability for companies to execute documents electronically, or e-signing, is no longer acceptable under subsection 127(1) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Act). Section 6(3)-(4) of the Determination authorised e-signing in response to the COVID-19 restrictions, as stated in the Explanatory Statement:
“…in this uncertain time when public health and travel restrictions and postal delays remain in place. This gives certainty that when company officers sign a document electronically (including an electronic document), the document has been validly executed.”
The Treasury Laws Amendment (2021 Measures No. 1) Bill 2021 (Cth) (Bill) intends to extend e-signing until 16 September 2021.[1] However, the Bill has been adjourned by the Senate until 11 May 2021.[2] As there are no other regulatory reliefs or permanent legislation in place, companies are required to return to pre-COVID conditions when executing documents. This means signatories are required to sign the same ‘static’ document.[3] The signatories must be either:
- two (2) directors of the company;
- one (1) director and one (1) secretary of the company; or
- the sole director for a proprietary company when they are also the secretary.[4]
Takeaways
Companies can no longer execute documents by e-signing. They should return to the framework for document execution provided under section 127(1) of the Act.
Links and further references
Legislation
Commonwealth, Parliamentary Debates, Senate, 18 March 2021, 99 (Amanda Stroker, Assistant Minister to the Attorney-General)
Corporations (Coronavirus Economic Response) Determination (No. 3) 2020 (Cth) Explanatory Statement
Treasury Laws Amendment (2021 Measures No. 1) Bill 2021 (Cth) Explanatory Memorandum
Corporations (Coronavirus Economic Response) Determination (No 3) 2020 (Cth)
Treasury Laws Amendment (2021 Measures No. 1) Bill 2021 (Cth)
Cases
Bendigo and Adelaide Bank Limited v Pickard [2019] SASC 123
Further information about directors duties
If you need advice on your obligations as the officer of a company, contact us for a confidential and obligation-free discussion:
Malcolm Burrows B.Bus.,MBA.,LL.B.,LL.M.,MQLS.
Legal Practice Director
T: +61 7 3221 0013 (preferred)
M: +61 419 726 535
E: mburrows@dundaslawyers.com.au
Disclaimer
This article contains general commentary only. You should not rely on the commentary as legal advice. Specific legal advice should be obtained to ascertain how the law applies to your particular circumstances.
[1] See Treasury Laws Amendment (2021 Measures No. 1) Bill 2021 (Cth) sch 1; see also Treasury Laws Amendment (2021 Measures No. 1) Bill 2021 (Cth) Explanatory Memorandum, 3.
[2] See Commonwealth, Parliamentary Debates, Senate, 18 March 2021, 99 (Amanda Stroker, Assistant Minister to the Attorney-General).
[3] See Bendigo and Adelaide Bank Limited v Pickard [2019] SASC 123, [70].
[4] Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 127(1).
Related insights about directors duties
-
Federal Court class actions – requirements explained
This article provides an overview of the mechanics behind a Class Action in the Federal Court of Australia. It covers the requirements to commence the action, the ability for members to opt out, and the limits on Class Actions, giving readers a comprehensive understanding of the process and obligations.
-
Registration of .au domain names – what does this mean for businesses?
From 24 March 2022, any persons with a verified connection to Australia will be able to apply for a domain name ending in .au, also known as a direct name or second level name (Direct Name). Any business can apply for a Direct Name as long as they meet the eligibility criteria under the .au…
-
Use of a competitors trade marks for comparative advertising
Comparative advertising can be a powerful tool, but it must be done within the bounds of the law. Learn more about the legal implications of comparative advertising in Australia, including the case of GlaxoSmithKline Australia Pty Ltd v Reckitt Benckiser (Australia) Pty Limited (No 2) [2018] FCA 1.
-
Uber found in breach of Australian privacy laws
This article provides an overview of interesting decisions of Australian Courts in Corporate Law, Technology Law and Intellectual Property. With cases on Trade Marks, Copyright, Defamation, Negligence, Joint Ventures and Confidential Information, it is an invaluable resource for anyone interested in these areas.
-
Therapeutic Goods Advertising Code 2021 update
The Therapeutic Goods Administration has released the Therapeutic Goods Advertising Code 2021 (Cth), introducing changes to distinguish between physical and online therapeutic goods, updates to medical device and medicine advertising, and more. Get the details to stay informed and ensure compliance with the new rules.
-
7-Eleven customer survey: implied consent?
The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner found 7-Eleven Stores Pty Ltd are in breach of the Australian Privacy Principles (APP’s). Learn more about the findings, implications, and how businesses can comply with the APP’s.
-
Use of confidential information – the springboard injunction
This article examines the UK decision of Forse & ors v Secarma Ltd & ors [2019] EWCA Civ 215, which discussed the legal concept of a springboard injunction, and its implications in Australia. The Court must consider similar principles to determine if an injunction should be granted.
-
Is it a debt? – legal test and creditors’ statutory demands
This article examines a Court decision that could have a significant impact on creditors making statutory demands. Learn more about the case of Matrix Group Co Pty Ltd [2021] NSWSC 1042, and the implications for creditors, as well as relevant legislation and case law.
-
Present entitlement in trusts – what it means
Explore the High Court’s interpretation of “present entitlement” under the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 (Cth). Learn when a person has a vested interest in trust assets and how the trustee’s discretion affects the beneficiary’s entitlement.
