Legal Framework
29 Section 191 of the Act provides:
(1) In this section:
affected policy owner means the owner of a policy that is referable to a statutory fund affected by a scheme.
approved summary means a summary approved by APRA.
(2) An application for confirmation of a scheme may not be made unless:
(a) a copy of the scheme and any actuarial report on which the scheme is based have been given to APRA in accordance with the regulations; and
(b) notice of intention to make the application has been published by the applicant in accordance with the regulations; and
(c) an approved summary of the scheme has been given to every affected policy owner.
(3) Without limiting the provision that may be made by the regulations for the purposes of paragraph (2)(b), the notice referred to in that paragraph must include, in relation to each company affected by the scheme, details of the place and time at which an affected policy owner may obtain a copy of the scheme.
(4) An affected policy owner is entitled, on his or her request, to be provided by the company with one copy of the scheme free of charge.
(5) The Court may dispense with the need for compliance with paragraph (2)(c) in relation to a particular scheme if it is satisfied that, because of the nature of the scheme or the circumstances attending its preparation, it is not necessary that the paragraph be complied with.
30 Section 10 provides:
(1) For the purposes of this Act:
(a) a life company issues a policy when the company enters into the contract that constitutes the policy; and
(b) a policy is issued to the person with whom the life company enters into the contract.
(2) For the purposes of this Act, the owner of a policy is:
(a) the person to whom the policy is issued; or
(b) if the rights of that person under the policy have been assigned under this Act or transferred by the operation of the policy, the person who has those rights.
31 The cases have recognised that the policy underlying s 191(2)(c) is to give every affected policy owner a summary of the scheme and an opportunity, if he or she so desires, to make submissions to the Court in respect of any application for confirmation of the Scheme. In particular, in The Application of Commonwealth Life Ltd & Anor [2003] FCA 501; (2003) 12 ANZ Insurance Cases 90-117 at [8], Sackville J stated:
I think that some care needs to be taken before an order is made dispensing with the requirements of s191(2)(c) of the Act. Clearly enough, the policy underlying the statutory requirement, when read in conjunction with s191(2)(b), is to give every affected policyholder a summary of the scheme and, an opportunity, if he or she so desires, to make submissions to the Court in respect of any application for confirmation of the scheme. A right to be heard in relation to a proposed scheme may be of little value if a person does not know of the proposal.
32 The principle stated by Sackville J has most recently been approved in the context of applications for dispensation under s 17C in Application of Gordian RunOff Limited under the Insurance Act 1973 (Cth) [2013] FCA 983 at [16]; AAI Limited, application under the Insurance Act 1973 (Cth) [2015] FCA 452 at [22]; QBE Insurance (Australia) Ltd, in the matter of Division 3A of Part IIIA of the Insurance Act 1973 (Cth) & QBE Insurance (Australia) Ltd [2015] FCA 1223 at [23].
33 Even so, the applicants submitted that dispensation from the requirement to give policy owners referable to the receiving fund, such as AMP Life policy owners, a summary of the Scheme has been routinely granted in previous applications under Pt 9 of the Act. Examples given were Asteron Life Ltd, in the matter of Asteron Life Ltd [2011] FCA 1230; BT Life Limited, in the matter of BT Life Limited [2011] FCA 1100; St Andrew's Life Insurance Pty Ltd, the application of St Andrew's Life Insurance Pty Ltd and The Colonial Mutual Life Assurance Society Limited [2010] FCA 488; PrefSure Life Limited & Tower Australia Limited [2007] FCA 88.
34 While each case necessarily turns on its own facts, the considerations which have been taken into account in the exercise of the discretion to grant dispensation include:
(1) the intra-group nature of a scheme due to the lack of, or limited, difficulty in passing on a claim that is made on the transferring insurer to the receiving insurer: see Calliden Group Limited in the matter of Calliden Group Limited [2007] FCA 2019 ("Re Calliden Group"); MMIA Pty Ltd and QBE Insurance (Australia) Limited [2008] FCA 1239 ("Re MMIA");
(2) the nature of the scheme and whether it involves changes to the contractual benefits or entitlements and security of policy owners in respect of whom dispensation is sought;
(3) evidence by qualified actuaries as to whether policy owners in respect of whom dispensation is sought will be detrimentally affected by the scheme;
(4) the practical difficulties and the costs involved in providing a scheme summary to policy owners in respect of whom dispensation is sought;
(5) the extent to which the scheme may be brought to the attention of policy owners by means other than the scheme summary;
(6) the lack of material changes to policy terms and conditions: see Re QBE; and
(7) the involvement and attitude of APRA to the application: see Re Calliden Group ; Re MMIA; Westport Insurance Corporation, in the matter of Westport Insurance Corporation [2009] FCA 1357; (2009) 16 ANZ Insurance Cases 61-830; American Home Assurance Company, in the matter of American Home Assurance Company [2010] FCA 1499; Re QBE.
35 The discretion to make dispensation orders is a general one and the provision does not specify the criteria that the Court is to apply in determining whether "the nature of the scheme or the circumstances attending its preparation warrant" the making of proposed orders: Re QBE at [16].