{"id":"F2021L01031","name":"Civil Dispute Resolution Regulations 2021","slug":"civil-dispute-resolution-regulations-2021","collection":"legislative_instrument","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":101984,"registerId":"commonwealth-F2021L01031-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-03","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"Name","content":"#### 1 Name\n\n  This instrument is the Civil Dispute Resolution Regulations 2021.","sortOrder":0},{"sectionNumber":"3","sectionType":"section","heading":"Authority","content":"#### 3 Authority\n\n  This instrument in made under the Civil Dispute Resolution Act 2011.","sortOrder":1},{"sectionNumber":"5","sectionType":"section","heading":"Definitions","content":"#### 5 Definitions\n\n  In this instrument:\n\n> Act means the Civil Dispute Resolution Act 2011.","sortOrder":2},{"sectionNumber":"6","sectionType":"section","heading":"Excluded proceedings","content":"#### 6 Excluded proceedings\n\n  For the purposes of subsection 17(1) of the Act, the following proceedings are prescribed:\n    (a) proceedings for a sequestration order under section 43 of the Bankruptcy Act 1966, if the act of bankruptcy relied on arose under paragraph 40(1)(g) of that Act;\n    (b) proceedings for an order under section 459A of the Corporations Act 2001 to wind up a company in insolvency, if the application for the order relies on a failure by the company to comply with a statutory demand (within the meaning of that Act);\n    (c) proceedings for review of a decision of a Registrar of an eligible court.","sortOrder":3},{"sectionNumber":"7","sectionType":"section","heading":"Repeal of this instrument","content":"#### 7 Repeal of this instrument\n\n  This instrument is repealed at the start of 1 October 2027.","sortOrder":4}],"analysis":{"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":3,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"The instrument prescribes specific categories of proceedings to be treated as \"excluded proceedings\" for the purposes of subsection 17(1) of the Civil Dispute Resolution Act 2011 (Reg 6). The regulation itself does not state an intention to expand or contract the Act beyond listing those exclusions; it operates by narrowing the set of proceedings to which subsection 17(1) will apply while the regulations are in force. There is no statement in the instrument indicating a change from an earlier regulatory scope."},"complexity_factors":["Narrow subject matter confined to prescribing specific excluded proceedings (limited scope).","Cross-references to multiple external statutes (Bankruptcy Act 1966 and Corporations Act 2001) require reading those Acts to determine applicability (Reg 6(a)–(b)).","Conditional exclusions that depend on particular paragraphs or factual triggers in other statutes (e.g. paragraph 40(1)(g) and statutory demand reliance) increase interpretive steps (Reg 6(a)–(b)).","An exclusion based on review of a Registrar’s decision creates procedural interaction with court administration (Reg 6(c)).","Sunset clause requires temporal tracking and potential transitional planning (Reg 7)."],"plain_english_summary":"### What this instrument does, in plain terms\n\n- Mechanically, the Civil Dispute Resolution Regulations 2021 (the instrument) names the regulation, records the statute under which it is made (the Civil Dispute Resolution Act 2011) and defines the word “Act” to mean that statute (Regulations 1, 3 and 5).  \n\n- The operative change is in Regulation 6: it prescribes three categories of court proceedings that are to be treated as \"excluded proceedings\" for the purposes of subsection 17(1) of the Civil Dispute Resolution Act 2011 (Reg 6). Those categories are:  \n  - proceedings for a sequestration order under section 43 of the Bankruptcy Act 1966, but only when the relied-on act of bankruptcy arose under paragraph 40(1)(g) of that Act (Reg 6(a));  \n  - proceedings under section 459A of the Corporations Act 2001 to wind up a company for insolvency, but only when the application depends on the company not complying with a statutory demand (as defined in the Corporations Act) (Reg 6(b));  \n  - proceedings that are reviews of decisions made by a Registrar of an eligible court (Reg 6(c)).  \n\n- The instrument also includes a sunset: it is repealed at the start of 1 October 2027 (Reg 7).\n\n### Who is directly affected and who decides\n\n- The immediate legal effect attaches to the specific classes of proceedings listed in Regulation 6. Parties to those proceedings will be treated as falling within the prescribed \"excluded proceedings\" category for the purpose identified in subsection 17(1) of the Act (Reg 6).  \n\n- The instrument is made under the Civil Dispute Resolution Act 2011 (Reg 3). The regulations themselves set the exclusion categories; courts, registrars and practitioners must apply those categories when determining whether a proceeding falls within subsection 17(1) (Reg 6(c) is itself about reviews of registrar decisions).  \n\n### Why this matters (mechanics, incentives and compliance effects)\n\n- Mechanically, prescribing these exclusions narrows the set of proceedings that are subject to whatever obligations or effects flow from subsection 17(1) of the Act. The regulation does not contain the text of subsection 17(1), so one must read the Act together with this instrument to see the full legal impact (Reg 5 cross‑references the Act).  \n\n- Incentives and behaviour: excluding particular proceeding types changes the incentives for parties in those categories by removing the operation of subsection 17(1) for them (Reg 6). That may alter choices by applicants, respondents, lawyers and courts about steps taken before or during litigation for those categories.  \n\n- Compliance burden and legal work: because the exclusions depend on cross‑references to specific provisions in the Bankruptcy Act 1966 and the Corporations Act 2001 (Reg 6(a)–(b)), legal advisers and court officers need to check the referenced provisions to determine if an exclusion applies in any given case. That creates an interpretive task and an administrative step when practitioners advise clients or when courts consider whether subsection 17(1) applies.  \n\n- Bureaucratic discretion and implementation risk: one listed exclusion relates to review of decisions of a Registrar of an eligible court (Reg 6(c)). That creates an operational interaction between registrars and courts; registrars’ decisions may be insulated from the subsection 17(1) pathway only insofar as the review proceedings fall within this prescribed category, so application will turn on procedural classification.  \n\n- Temporary character and transition costs: the instrument includes a repeal date (start of 1 October 2027) (Reg 7). Parties and practitioners will need to account for the instrument while it is in force and be prepared for the regulatory position to lapse after the repeal date unless replaced or extended. That introduces an opportunity cost and potential transition work for court practice and legal advisers.  \n\n### Trade-offs and concentrated vs diffuse effects\n\n- Concentrated effects: the benefits (or relief from the operation of subsection 17(1)) accrue directly to parties in the narrow categories listed in Regulation 6.  \n\n- Diffuse effects: the administrative consequences (e.g., additional checking of statutory triggers, registry procedures, and potential practice adjustments ahead of the repeal date) are felt by courts, registrars and legal practitioners across cases, though the substantive legal change only affects the listed proceeding types.  \n\n### Source citations\n\n- Definition of the Act: Reg 5.  \n- Prescribed excluded proceedings and their detailed conditions: Reg 6(a)–(c).  \n- Authority under which the instrument is made: Reg 3.  \n- Repeal/sunset: Reg 7.\n\n(End of summary.)"},"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"The regulation performs exactly the function intended by its enabling Act — prescribing specific proceedings that are exempt from pre-litigation dispute resolution requirements. It has not expanded beyond this narrow technical purpose."},"complexity_factors":["Only 7 sections total, with 3 being administrative (name, authority, repeal)","Single definition ('Act') in interpretation section","No nested cross-references beyond pointing to the parent Act and other legislation","Simple list structure for excluded proceedings (paragraphs a, b, c) with no sub-exceptions or conditional logic","Straightforward sunset clause with fixed date"],"plain_english_summary":"This is a short regulation that creates **exceptions to the general rule that people must try to resolve disputes before going to court**.\n\nUnder the Civil Dispute Resolution Act 2011, most people starting a court case must first file a \"genuine steps statement\" — basically, document what they did to try to settle the dispute without litigation (such as mediation or negotiation). This regulation says **three specific types of court cases are exempt** from that requirement:\n\n* **Bankruptcy proceedings** where someone is seeking to make another person bankrupt based on a failure to comply with a bankruptcy notice\n* **Company wind-up proceedings** where a company is being forced into liquidation because it didn't respond to a statutory demand (a formal request to pay a debt)\n* **Appeals against decisions made by court Registrars** (court officials who handle administrative and procedural matters)\n\n**Why this matters:** These exemptions recognise that some legal processes are urgent or procedural in nature, where attempting settlement first would be impractical or pointless. For example, statutory demands in corporate insolvency have strict time limits — if a company doesn't respond within 21 days, it's presumed insolvent, and there's little room for negotiation.\n\nThe regulation **automatically expires on 1 October 2027**, meaning Parliament will need to revisit these exemptions before then."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/civil-dispute-resolution-regulations-2021","history":"/api/acts/civil-dispute-resolution-regulations-2021/history","analysis":"/api/acts/civil-dispute-resolution-regulations-2021/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/civil-dispute-resolution-regulations-2021/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/civil-dispute-resolution-regulations-2021/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/civil-dispute-resolution-regulations-2021/documents"}}