Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 184

Caveat lender, and consistency in law

In our legal firm, we have noticed numerous clients helping their children financially to enter the property market. Family loans can have complexities and there are potential risks if the loan is not documented properly. Most clients have taken our advice and documented their arrangements as loans, however we also advise them to review their actions as they should not be regarded as ‘set and forget’ transactions given that the law has a statute of limitations in each state and territory.

In addition, it is important that the conduct is consistent with the documents for them to be effective. Otherwise, a disappointed spouse of your child could claim that the loans were not authentic, merely a sham.

Family arrangements may not always turn out well

The recent case of Bircher & Bircher and Anor (2016 FamCAFC 123) is instructive. A son had written mortgage documents regarding two loans he received from his father. The documents seemed to be properly drafted. However, it seems that ‘the wife’ (as the cases refer to female spouses in the Family Court) claimed that the loans were almost too well drafted so as to arouse suspicion. The judge observed that the husband detailed conversations he had with his father “it would seem, with a great deal of particularity in … affidavits”. A schedule produced by the father was “entirely self-serving”.

The original judge was not impressed by any of the parties and said both “were plainly unhealthily interested in making money through means other than just getting a job and working”.

Much was made in court of the fact that a witness to each of the mortgages was the father’s administrative assistant, and later his wife.

Similarly, the conduct of the loan was examined closely. No explanation was provided for why the initial agreement of a flat interest payment was changed to compound interest. Purported expenses were added to the loan balance but there was no agreement as to this arrangement. While the initial judge found that the loans were real and that the interest was properly sought, the Court of Appeal found that the judge needed to establish the terms of the loan and the evidence to support it.

Risks involved in such loans

The case reveals the risks involved for the person making the loans. Quite apart from reputational risk, the court found that, as the parties did not have substantial assets and the husband and father failed in the appeal, they should pay the wife’s costs. The costs order was made joint and several so the father may well have had to pay all of the costs of that hearing.

The matter was sent back to the Family Court for a trial on the evidence about the loan. These cases are not cheap to run and it remains to be seen who will be asked to pay the costs of that hearing.

The lesson here is that you need to have clear loan documents that reflect an agreement that is carried out and have the other spouse as a party to the loan.

With respect, we beg to differ with Shakespeare: neither a borrower nor a lender be, unless you document the loan properly and administer it in accordance with those documents.

 

Donal Griffin is a Principal of Legacy Law, a legal firm specialising in protecting family assets. This article is educational and does not consider any individual circumstances.

 

  •   1 December 2016
  •      
  •   

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

Family trust tax: When is a loan not a loan?

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Testamentary trusts post-budget: Estate planning, tax reform and the ‘death tax’ debate

Proposed Budget changes to taxation are casting new uncertainty over testamentary trusts, prompting closer scrutiny of estate planning structures and the real implications of reforms still taking shape.

How to minimise tax with a will

Inheritance tax implications in Australia may surprise some, as poor estate planning without proper wills or trusts can lead to costly tax bills and delays for beneficiaries.

Meg on SMSFs: The CGT changes don’t impact super but what about Div 296 tax decisions?

New CGT rules could tip the scales in the super vs non-super debate. For those facing the Division 296 tax, the case for withdrawing has gotten more complex. A "comparison rate" tool may help assess decisions.

High quality businesses are on sale

Beneath the dominance of the ASX's largest stocks, much of the market has been left behind. High-quality companies are now trading at levels rarely seen, offering opportunities for investors willing to look deeper.

The strange effect of the 30% minimum capital gains tax

The 30% minimum tax on capital gains sits at the heart of the budget's proposed reforms. Yet the mechanics reveal anomalies that introduce unexpected distortions that raise questions about its design.

Welcome to Firstlinks Edition 667 with weekend update

The downfall of the giant and three lessons for investors.

  • 18 June 2026

Latest Updates

Latest from Morningstar

Ranking three common retirement strategies

The defining challenge of retirement isn't just about building wealth, it's about converting your lifetime savings into sustainable income. A holistic understanding of different strategies can improve long-term outcomes.

Economy

Was life really better in the good old days?

Are we worse off than previous generations? Lately, there seems to be a heightened level of angst that economic conditions are getting harder and that the two-party political system (and maybe democracy too) is failing voters.

Retirement

Australia has saved $4.5 trillion for retirement. Here's what matters more

Most Australians approaching retirement can tell you the exact dollar value of their super account. But success depends on more than a sizeable balance. Here's four key questions to ask yourself at the start of the financial year. 

Who gains in an AI-supercharged economy?

AI is already reshaping the economy, but companies building transformative technologies rarely capture the greatest long-term value. Instead, those benefits accrue to the users. We may well see this pattern reproduced. 

Taxation

Div 296's million-dollar reset worth $25,000

The 'cost base reset' for the new super tax is being sold as protection for pre-July gains. A worked example shows $1M of protection is worth about $25,000, and the real deadline has not passed.

Latest from Morningstar

The forecasting fix that Wall Street missed

Asking whether markets are overpriced may be the wrong question. New research suggests that traditional valuation metrics used to forecast returns may have been misread. Here are five takeaways for investors.

Investment strategies

Should a fund manager invest their own money differently?

Investors often like the idea that fund managers should invest client money exactly as they invest their own. But reality is more complicated. Unique circumstances make a different approach rational and, at times, beneficial.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2026 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.