When a loved one passes away, the task of managing their final affairs can feel overwhelming. Dealing with banks, real estate, and other assets often requires a formal legal authority before anything can be done. This is where the Supreme Court of NSW steps in to issue a grant that empowers someone to manage the deceased's estate. The two most common types of grants are a Grant of Probate and a Grant of Letters of Administration . The one you need depends entirely on one crucial factor: whether the deceased left a valid will. Grant of Probate: When There Is a Will A Grant of Probate is a formal document issued by the Court that certifies a deceased person's will is valid and gives the person named as the executor the legal authority to carry out the instructions in that will. Who applies? The executor(s) named in the deceased’s last valid will. What is its purpose? It confirms the executor’s role and allows them to manage the estate. With this grant, the executor can: Access and close bank accounts. Sell or transfer property, such as the family home. Claim life insurance and superannuation benefits. Pay the deceased’s debts. Distribute the remaining assets to the beneficiaries as specified in the will. In essence, Probate is the legal process of bringing a will to life and giving the executor the green light to follow the deceased's final wishes. Letters of Administration: When There Is No Will When a person dies without a valid will or no will at all, they are said to have died "intestate." In this situation, there is no will to follow and no named executor to take charge. This is where a Grant of Letters of Administration is needed. Who applies? Since there's no executor, the law sets out an order of priority for who is eligible to apply to the Court to manage the estate. This is usually the deceased’s closest next of kin, starting with their spouse or de facto partner, then children, parents, and so on. The person appointed by the Court is called an administrator . What is its purpose? The grant gives the administrator the same powers as an executor—to collect assets and pay debts. However, the crucial difference lies in the distribution of the estate. Instead of following the instructions of a will, the administrator must distribute the assets according to a strict formula set out in NSW law (the Succession Act 2006 ). This is known as the "rules of intestacy." Letters of Administration can also be required if there is a will, but the named executor is deceased, unwilling, or unable to act. Is a Grant Always Necessary? For very small estates, a formal grant may not be needed. If the deceased only had a small amount of money in a bank account, the bank might agree to release the funds to the next of kin without a grant. However, this is at the discretion of the financial institution. If the estate involves real estate of any kind, a grant will almost certainly be required to transfer the title.  The best way to ensure your assets are distributed according to your wishes and to simplify the process for your loved ones is to have a legally valid and up-to-date will. This allows you to choose your own executor and decide exactly who gets what, avoiding the strict, impersonal formula of intestacy law.

Artificial intelligence is no longer science fiction; it's a fundamental part of the modern business toolkit. From automating client communications and analysing contracts to making hiring decisions and setting prices, AI is driving unprecedented efficiency and innovation. But as we integrate these powerful tools deeper into our operations, we venture into a new and complex legal and ethical landscape. For businesses in Australia, harnessing the power of AI means looking beyond the technological benefits and confronting the critical legal questions it raises. Are you prepared for the risks? Key Legal Battlegrounds for AI in Business The introduction of AI challenges long-standing legal principles. Our current laws were written for human actors, and applying them to autonomous, learning systems creates significant gray areas. Contracts and Liability: Who's Responsible When the AI Gets It Wrong? Imagine an AI system, tasked with procurement, negotiates and executes a contract for faulty goods. Who is liable for the breach? The business that deployed the AI? The AI's developer? The issue strikes at the heart of contract law, which is built on human concepts like intent and capacity. Furthermore, the "black box" problem—where an AI's decision-making process is too complex for even its creators to fully understand—makes it incredibly difficult to determine fault when something goes wrong. If an AI-driven financial advisor gives negligent advice, proving the 'how' and 'why' becomes a major legal hurdle. Intellectual Property: Can an AI Be an Inventor? Generative AI can now create art, write code, and even design new products. This raises a fundamental IP question: who owns AI-generated work? Under current Australian law, copyright and patent ownership are tied to human authorship or invention. A landmark Federal Court case ( Thaler v Commissioner of Patents ) confirmed that an AI cannot be named as an "inventor" on a patent application. This means businesses must have clear policies on how AI is used in the creative and inventive process to ensure they can protect the resulting intellectual property. Data Privacy: The Fuel for the AI Engine AI systems are fuelled by data—often, vast amounts of it. This directly engages your responsibilities under Australia’s Privacy Act 1988 . Businesses must consider: Lawful Collection: Are you transparently informing individuals that their personal information will be used to train or be processed by AI systems? Data Security: How are you protecting the massive datasets used by your AI from cyber threats and breaches? Automated Decisions: If your AI makes a significant decision about an individual (e.g., approves or denies a credit application), can you explain the basis of that decision as required by privacy principles? The Ethical Tightrope: Beyond Legal Compliance Staying on the right side of the law is just the starting point. The ethical implications of AI usage can carry enormous reputational risk and impact your social license to operate. Bias and Discrimination An AI is only as good as the data it's trained on. If historical data reflects societal biases (e.g., hiring practices that favoured one demographic over another), the AI will learn and perpetuate those biases, often at scale. Using a biased AI for recruitment or performance management could lead to discriminatory outcomes that are not only unethical but also a breach of anti-discrimination laws. Transparency and Explainability When a customer is denied a loan or a candidate is rejected for a job by an AI, they deserve to know why. Businesses have an ethical obligation to strive for "explainable AI." A lack of transparency can erode trust with customers, employees, and the public, leading to a perception that your business uses arbitrary or unfair automated processes. Accountability and Human Oversight Ultimately, an AI is a tool. A business cannot delegate its corporate responsibility to an algorithm. It's crucial to establish clear governance frameworks that define who is accountable for the AI's deployment and outcomes. Meaningful human oversight must be maintained to catch errors, override poor decisions, and ensure the technology operates in alignment with your company 's values. Charting a Course: Practical Steps for Your Business The legal and ethical landscape for AI is evolving rapidly. To navigate it successfully, businesses should be proactive: Conduct an AI Audit: Identify all the AI systems used in your business and assess them for legal compliance, data privacy risks, and potential bias. Develop an AI Governance Policy: Create clear internal rules for the ethical development, procurement, and deployment of AI. Define roles and responsibilities for oversight. Prioritise Transparency: Be open with your stakeholders about how and where you use AI. Update your privacy policies and terms of service accordingly. Stay Informed: Keep up-to-date with guidance from regulatory bodies and emerging case law concerning AI in Australia. Seek Expert Advice: Before deploying a new AI system, consult with legal professionals who understand the intersection of technology, commercial law, and privacy.  AI offers a competitive edge that is too significant to ignore. However, embracing it without a clear-eyed view of the legal and ethical risks is a gamble. The businesses that thrive in the algorithmic age will be those that innovate responsibly, building a foundation of trust and accountability around their technology.