XN000022-1989-06-21 — Page 15

13

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 21, 1989

BILL LOWERS AGE OF MAJORITY

THE LAW REFORM (LEGAL EFFECTS OF AGE) BILL 1989 WILL LOWER THE AGE OF MAJORITY AND WILL EFFECT CHANGES IN THE LAW RELATING TO MINORS CONTRACTS. WILLS AND COMPANIES, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. THE HON JEREMY MATHEWS, SAID IN THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL TODAY (WEDNESDAY).

MOVING THE SECOND READING OF THE BILL, MR MATHEWS SAID IT GAVE EFFECT TO THE MAIN RECOMMENDATION IN A REPORT BY THE LAN REFORM COMMISSION ON THE EFFECTS OF AGE IN CIVIL LAW.

IN

THE REPORT, WHICH WAS PUBLISHED IN APRIL 1986, RECOMMENDED, ESSENCE, THAT THE AGE AT WHICH A PERSON ATTAINED FULL LEGAL CAPACITY SHOULD. FOR MOST PURPOSES. BE REDUCED FROM 21 TO 18.

MR MATHEWS EXPLAINED THAT THE LAW AT PRESENT DEFINED "A MINOR" AS A PERSON WHO HAD NOT ATTAINED THE AGE OF 21.

HE SAID THE PROTECTION OFFERED BY THE LAW ΤΟ MINORS IN LIMITING THEIR CAPACITY TO MAKE CONTRACTS AND TO DEAL WITH PROPERTY MIGHT ACT TO THE MINOR'S DETRIMENT IN BOTH HIS PERSONAL AND BUSINESS LIFE.

"IT IS FELT THERE IS NO GOOD REASON WHY YOUNG PERSONS WHO ARE WORKING AND ENJOYING A DEGREE OF FINANCIAL INDEPENDENCE SHOULD SUFFER THESE CONSTRAINTS.

·

"FROM VARIOUS SURVEYS AND STUDIES THE COMMISSION CONCLUDED THAT AT 18 YEARS OF AGE MOST YOUNG PERSONS HAVE ATTAINED THE NECESSARY INDEPENDENCE.

"CLAUSES 2 AND 6 OF THE BILL THEREFORE PROVIDE FOR THE AGE OF MAJORITY TO BE REDUCED TO 18, HE SAID.

..

MR MATHEWS SAID THERE WERE THREE AMENDMENTS TO THE LAW RELATING TO MINORS' CONTRACTS.

THE FIRST AMENDMENT RELATED TO GUARANTEES.

"UNDER THE COMMON LAW, A PERSON ENTERING INTO A GUARANTEE OF AN OBLIGATION INCURRED BY A MINOR MAY AVOID LIABILITY UNDER THE GUARANTEE IF THE MINOR FAILS TO FULFILL HIS OR HER CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATION ON THE GROUND OF AGE.

"THIS COULD LEAD TO INJUSTICE, AND A GUARANTEE IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD NO LONGER BE UNENFORCEABLE AGAINST THE GUARANTOR FOR THAT REASON ALONE. CLAUSE 3 OF THE BILL So PROVIDES, EXPLAINED.

[

HE

THE SECOND AMENDMENT, IN RELATION ΤΟ CONTRACTS WITH MINORS, REFERRED TO SECTION 46 OF THE DISTRICT COURT ORDINANCE WHICH REMOVED THE DEFENCE OF MINORITY IN RESPECT OF CLAIMS OF UP TO $60,000 BROUGHT IN THE DISTRICT COURT.

/"THIS PROVISION