By Dr Michelle Sharpe -
Key decisions
- Hill v Zuda Pty Ltd as Trustee for the Holly Superannuation Fund & Ors [2022] HCA 21
- Hore v The Queen; Wichen v The Queen [2022] HCA 22
Superannuation
Self-managed superannuation fund
In Hill v Zuda Pty Ltd as Trustee for the Holly Superannuation Fund & Ors [2022] HCA 21 (15 June 2022) the High Court was required to determine, as a matter of statutory construction, whether reg 6.17A of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Regulations 1994 (Cth) (‘Regulations’) – made under the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (Cth) (‘Supervision Act’) – applied to a self-managed superannuation fund (‘SMSF’).
Zuda Pty Ltd (‘Zuda’) is the trustee of a SMSF known as the Holly Superannuation Fund (‘Fund’) which was created by a trust deed dated 14 June 2000 (‘Trust Deed’). Alec Sodhy and his de facto partner, Jennifer Murray, were each a member of the Fund and a director of Zuda. The applicant (‘Hill’) is the only child of Mr Sodhy. In 2011 the Trust Deed was amended to insert a clause described as a ‘binding death benefit nomination’ (‘BDBN’). The BDBN provides that if either Mr Sodhy or Ms Murray died, Zuda was required to distribute the whole of the deceased member’s balance in the Fund to the surviving member. Mr Sodhy died in 2016. Hill commenced proceedings in the Supreme Court of Western Australia seeking declaratory and injunctive relief against Zuda on the basis that the BDBN failed to comply with reg 6.17A of the Regulations.
