Commercial - Parry Field Lawyers

New Zealand welcomes foreign investment as a way to develop the economy and boost the capability of New Zealand companies. However, if the investment involves sensitive New Zealand assets, the Overseas Investment Office (OIO), requires overseas investors to go through a mandatory application process. So, before an overseas investor makes a purchase in New Zealand it is important to be aware of what’s involved in order to stay safe and avoid fines or adverse publicity. Our summary is set out below and we are happy to discuss your situation with you. Also checkout our Doing Business in New Zealand guide.

Who is an overseas person?

An “overseas person” is defined as a someone who is not a New Zealand citizen or a person ordinarily resident in New Zealand, or an entity (partnership, trust, company) incorporated overseas or where an overseas person has more than 25% ownership or control.

Even if the person making the purchase is not an “overseas person” they may be an “associate” of an overseas person, meaning that someone overseas is controlling their actions. The term “control” is given a very wide meaning and can be specific or general, indirect or direct. It recognises that where control exists, the purchaser is really the overseas person, and therefore approval is still needed.

Buying sensitive land

Consent is needed for five hectares or more of non-urban land (this covers most farms), or land which is defined to be sensitive:

foreshore, seabed or one of certain named islands;
greater than 4,000 square metres and contains (or adjoins) a reserve, lake or foreshore;
land of historical or conservation significance.

Farm land is a particularly sensitive potential acquisition. Farm land being sold must first be offered on the open market in New Zealand so that New Zealanders have the chance to buy it before an overseas person. Find out more about how it must be advertised.

Significant Business Assets

Consent is also required if an overseas person plans to:

establish a new business at a cost of more than $100 million;
acquire a business if the value of the business exceeds $100 million; or
acquire 25% or more of a company where the value of the consideration or the assets of the target company and its subsidiaries exceeds $100 million.

These monetary thresholds may be impacted by agreements with other countries. For example, the figure in 2023 is $618 million for Australian non-government investors. For those countries which have signed up to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership the figure will be $200 million.

If one of the above actions is proposed, then an investment proposal application may be needed.

What do investment proposals include?

An overseas person wishing to invest will need to provide comprehensive information about themselves and the proposed investment. To succeed they will need to satisfy both the ‘Investor Test’ and the ‘Benefit to New Zealand Test’.

The Investor Test requires applicants to show they are of good character, that they have business experience, and are financially committed to that investment.
The Benefit to New Zealand Test has 21 criteria. These include the chance to highlight benefits, such as whether the investment will create new jobs, what access the public will have to the land, new technology that may be brought in, and how historic heritage or conservation areas will be protected.

When making its decision on the proposal the OIO will also consider what would happen if the applicant did not make the investment. For example, they will be interested in likelihood of someone else buying the property or business and whether that person would invest (or not invest) further money in it.

It is important to note that if a consent is granted it will typically contain conditions that must be followed and also contain some requirements to report back to the OIO. If a consent is not granted and the investment goes ahead, penalties such as divestment of the acquisition as well as fines and even imprisonment may apply. This article describes what can happen if investors fail to get consent and go ahead anyway.

How long does the process take?

The OIO will provide an estimate of how long it will take to make its decision. It aims to respond within 40 working days for Significant Business Assets applications and within 65 working days for Sensitive Land applications. However, it may take more or less time, depending on the situation and the number of applications it is dealing with.

Approximately 25% of applications are immediately rejected as they lack information or are of poor quality, likely because the applicant did not get advice first. The OIO may also ask for more information from the applicant, which can delay the process.

We recommend seeking expert advice to help ensure the application is as correct as possible to avoid issues arising. We have experience with assisting applicants through this process and would be pleased to assist you.

Be sure to check out our free guides such as ‘Doing Business in New Zealand’ and the ‘Start Ups Legal Toolkit’.

If you have any further queries please do not hesitate to contact one of our experts at Parry Field Lawyers- stevenmoe@parryfield.com, yangsu@parryfield.com or annemariemora@parryfield.com

This article is general in nature and is not a substitute for legal advice. You should talk to a lawyer about your specific situation. Reproduction is permitted with prior approval and credit being given back to the source.

There are many business structure options in New Zealand, including companies, partnerships and Trusts, and you want to be sure you are picking the right one. We frequently assist clients who are considering starting a business navigate the different business structure options to find what best suits their needs. The various business structure options each have their own pros and cons. What the best structure is for you will depend on your particular circumstance, desire and purpose.

The simple and easy structure which are well understood, such as a Company or Sole Trader, will work best for most businesses. If you are purpose driven, a Charitable Trust or Incorporated Society may be more appropriate. Increasingly we are also working with clients who want to merge both purpose and profits and for these clients we assist by creating unique dual structure approaches. In this article we have summarised the key points for the most common structures that are used in New Zealand. We are happy to meet and discuss options with you.

Two other critical points before we look at the options:

Get your strategy and purpose right before you decide on a legal entity type to use. Each one has positives and negatives so know what your end goal and the impact you want to see is first – after that look at which will help you get there. They are each just tools for empowering you to have impact.
Second, we are offering legal thoughts on key elements of these structures but there are other considerations too – in particular always ensure you get great accounting and tax input on the financial side of these alternatives.

Now turning to the options:

Company
Who	Owner = Shareholder Manager = DirectorThe owners may also be the manager
Liability	Is a separate legally recognised entity
Laws	The Companies Act 1993 governs companies
Who signs	The Director
If things go wrong	Companies limit liability for the owner*
Key documents	None required. Can choose to adopt a constitution or shareholders agreement
Visibility	Ownership and management is publicly visible on Companies Register
Difficulty to start	Moderate

* There are certain limited circumstances when the owners of the company may be liable. If the owners are also managing the company as directors, they are exposed to certain liability as managers.

Sole Trader
Who	Owned and managed by ‘sole’ owner
Liability	Not separate from entity
Laws	No specific law governs sole traders
Who signs	The owner
If things go wrong	The owner is personally liable
Key documents	None required
Visibility	Private and not registered
Difficulty to start	Easy

Partnerships
Who	Owner = the Partners Manager = the Partners manage
Liability	Not separate from entity
Laws	Partnership Law Act 2019
Who signs	Partners
If things go wrong	Owners are personally and jointly liable
Key documents	None required Can choose to have a Partnership Agreement
Visibility	Private and not registered
Difficulty to start	Moderate

* One owner can bind all owners.

Limited Partnership
Who	Owner = Limited Partner Manager = General Partner
Liability	Is a separate legally recognised entity
Laws	Limited Partnership Act 2008
Who signs	The General Partner
If things go wrong	The General Partner Limit liability for the owner**
Key documents	Requires a Limited Partnership Agreement
Visibility	Private for the Limited Partners, public for General Partner
Difficulty to start	High

* Each Limited Partner will account for tax in accordance with its individual tax position.

** If the owner participates in the management of the business, they will be liable.

Unincorporated Joint Venture
Who	Owners = Partners Management determined by the Joint Venture Agreement
Liability	Not separate from entity
Laws	Contract law, but no specific law governs Unincorporated Join Venture
Who signs	Each partner
If things go wrong	Partners separately liable or as decided by the Joint Venture Agreement*
Key documents	None required Can choose to have a Joint Venture Agreement
Visibility	Private and not registered
Difficulty to start	High

* Owner will account for tax in accordance with its individual tax position.

Trading Trust
Who	Owner = settlor/donor gives assets (trust fund) to the Trading Trust on trust for the benefit of the beneficiary Management = the Trustee Company, manages the trust fund and pass on benefits to the beneficiary
Liability	Not separate from entity, creates an equitable relationship
Laws	Trusts Act 2019 and Companies Act 1993
Who signs	The Trustee Company
If things go wrong	The Trustee Company
Key documents	Trust Deed
Visibility	Private and not registered
Difficulty to start	High

Charitable Trust
Who	Owners = settlor/donor gives property (trust fund) to the Charitable Trust to benefit the community through charitable purposes Management = Trustees manage the trust fund to advance the charitable purposes
Liability	Is a separate legally recognised entity
Laws	Trusts Act 2019 and Charitable Trust Act 1957
Who signs	The Trustees
If things go wrong	The Trustees
Key documents	Trust Deed
Visibility	Registered on Charitable Trust Register and if a registered charity on Charities Services
Difficulty to start	Moderate

Incorporated Society
Who	Management = the Committee manages the funds to advance the purpose
Liability	Is a separate legally recognised entity
Laws	Incorporated Society Act 2022*
Who signs	The Committee, but this depends on the Constitution
If things go wrong	The Committee
Key documents	Constitution
Visibility	Registered on Incorporated Societies Register and if a registered charity on Charities Services
Difficulty to start	Moderate

* This is a new Act which has recently come into force, for more information on the new Act and requirements see our Incorporated Societies Act 2022: Information Hub.

Co-operatives Companies
Who	Owner = Members/shareholders Governance = Directors
Liability	Is a separate legally recognised entity
Laws	Co-operative Companies Act 1996 and Companies Act 1993
Who signs	The Directors
If things go wrong	Companies limit liability for the owners
Key documents	Constitution
Visibility	Registered on Companies
Difficulty to start	Moderate

For lots more information on co-operatives visit Cooperative Business New Zealand – https://nz.coop/

—

If you have any further queries please do not hesitate to contact one of our experts at Parry Field Lawyers- stevenmoe@parryfield.com, yangsu@parryfield.com, sophietremewan@parryfield.com, or annemariemora@parryfield.com

This article is general in nature and is not a substitute for legal advice. You should talk to a lawyer about your specific situation. Reproduction is permitted with prior approval and credit being given back to the source.

Entering into agreement and contracts is a crucial part of business. It is important to ensure that these transactions take place without hiccups, as disputes in contract can be costly, time consuming and damage relationships. In our line of work, we see similarities in the hurdles that trip people up when they are entering into contracts. To help with this we have created this list of 7 useful tips to assist and point out the hurdles to avoid when entering into contractual agreements.

Contract Formation

The basics required for the formations of a contract are: Offer, Consideration (usually money) and Acceptance. If those exist a contract may be in place – even if it is not written down.
Make sure you receive a signed copy of the final version of the contract. We often see issues arising where one party signs and send the contract to the other party, on the understanding that the contract is finalised, but the other party makes further changes before signing or doesn’t sign the contract at all.
It is essential to ensure you receive a finalised contract which is signed by all parties/ which incorporates all agreed changes.

Record Keeping

Save important emails, relevant folders, keeping written records of conversations (follow up email recording what was agreed; meeting minutes etc).
Tailor a system that works for you personally, works for your team and your organisation. Be disciplined and stick to it, making sure the process is clear and being followed by all relevant people.
Take time to review your process every now and again, to ensure they are still fit for purpose.
There are some legislative and contractual requirements for documents and records that must be kept for a specified time. Know your obligations and abide by them.

Language

If you have a few people in your business who enter into contracts for your business then when they are sending an email or making a phone call they have the potential to commit your business to something.
If that’s you, ensure that you do not use language that can commit the business to transactions unless you are 100% sure that what you are doing is acceptable, and achievable. To avoid this use “less binding” phrases that do not commit the company, i.e.
- “I will seek instructions”
- “I will confirm in writing”
- “I will talk to the leadership team and confirm”

Good Faith Transactions

While it is important to maintain good relationship it is hard, expensive and time consuming to get money back once it is paid, so if you are making a payment make sure there is an agreement in place.
To ensure a smooth transaction it is good practice to keep a record of the circumstances of good faith payment with an emphasis on recording when it would be repaid if no agreement was reached.

Variations

Changes to contracts are common practice in business. Variations offer much needed flexibility to agreements and allow contracts to be useful even in changing circumstances. However, poorly managed variations can present more bad than good. Poorly managed variation can be time consuming, expensive and strain the relationship between parties. They can result in misunderstanding or confusion between the parties or end up in lengthy and costly litigation.

Practical Tips:

Ask whether a variation to the contract is necessary, or if it can be dealt with some other way.
Check the processes for variation in agreements.
Clearly specify the terms of the contract that are being varied.
Consider the flow on effects on other clauses.
Minimise as much as possible oral variations and if they occur, record them in writing.

Reviewing Documents

If contract documents are not standard, are new/unfamiliar, have substantial variations to them, or carry the potential for increased liability, we recommend having the documents reviewed. Reviews might be internal, with a colleague or supervisor, or you could let a lawyer review documents.
Make sure you give the person reviewing the documents all relevant paperwork (the full contract) etc; so they can ensure consistency and understand the context when they review.

Confidentiality

Have a system in place to ensure confidentiality is kept and there is a process for dealing with breaches, as they may occur.
Make sure documents are marked as confidential.
When sending sensitive emails, double check who you are sending to and who is copied in to the email. Check long email chains for sensitive material.
Check your legal and contractual requirements. Are their specific requirements in your contracts to keep material confidential, or are there individuals you have to notify if there is a breach?

We hope that these tips are helpful in your negotiation of contracts. If you’d like to discuss then our team of experts would be happy to do so.

This article is not a substitute for legal advice and you should consult your lawyer about your specific situation. Please feel free to contact Steven Moe – stevenmoe@parryfield.com at Parry Field Lawyers

The law recognises that in certain events which are beyond the control of a party that it is not fair for that party to have to continue to comply with the contract.

The first step is to check what the contract actually says. It won’t apply if there is no such provision in the contract. Normally it will be called a “Force Majeure” clause. The courts will generally have a high standard if a party wants to rely on this as a grounds to not fulfill the contract. The sort of factors which will be relevant are:

How are the events described? Is it generic or specific? In this particular case it will be relevant to see if there is any reference to “disease” or better, epidemics? If there is a reference to an “Act of God” then that might arguably cover this too. The most important thing is to check the specific words.
Even if there is an event, does that mean that the performance cannot be done? Just because something costs more doesn’t make it impossible – it may be that you still have to comply. Again, the context is key.
A party needs to be in control – one of the things I have seen is some arguments that a “strike” should be a force majeure event – if it is listed then it may be, but typically the management can control a strike occurring, or not. So, it might not qualify as a force majeure event.
The last factor relates to mitigation. A party should take steps to ensure that the contract is complied with (ie they are mitigating and stopping the impact, if they can).The key point here is perhaps that the wording of the contract needs to be reviewed. If there is no such clause then it might be possible for the doctrine of frustration to apply – this is where an event makes performance impossible compared to what had been agreed. Again, context is key. The other thing to look for in contracts would be a “material adverse change” clause – these can apply where an event occurs that means the contract is affected. You should also review any termination clauses just to see what they provide for eg 30 days written notice? Start by reviewing your contracts and consider your current situation and what the next few weeks and months will hold. If you would like to discuss your contract and situation then we would be happy to do so.

This article is not a substitute for legal advice and you should consult your lawyer about your specific situation. For any questions, feel free to contact Steven Moe stevenmoe@parryfield.com or Kris Morrison krismorrison@parryfield.com at Parry Field Lawyers.

The ADLS (Auckland District Law Society) Deed of Lease is the document most commonly utilised for commercial tenancies. An updated version (6th edition) has recently been released.

The updated lease contains a number of key changes which, if left unamended, could prove problematic for landlords and/or tenants. We summarise some of those changes/issues below.

We always recommend that, before you sign a new Agreement to Lease, you forward it to us for our review – as once signed, it sets the terms of the Lease in stone, potentially having significant consequences down the track.

Insurance

The Lease now makes it clear that the tenant is responsible for meeting (part of) the insurance excess in respect of a claim – increased to a maximum of $2,000 (previously $500). The parties can of course negotiate a different excess amount, and some landlord will require tenants to meet the whole of their excess, which can be significant, particularly for earthquake damage.

It is important that Landlords ensure they can meet the insurance obligations set out in the lease and, if not, make specific changes to the documents which reflect the true insurance position. While the lease does provide that the Landlord will not be in breach if insurance cover becomes unavailable (other than because of the Landlord’s act or omission) the Landlord must still use all reasonable endeavours on an on-going basis to obtain cover. There are also additional obligations to advise the Tenant when cover becomes unavailable and to give reasons, as well as provide the Tenant with reasonable information relating to the cover on request.

The types of “optional” insurances that the Landlord may insure against – loss of rent, loss to fixtures and fittings and public liability – have been moved to the First Schedule and, if not specifically deleted, mean a landlord may be obliged to effect insurance that they do not have in place.

Landlords should also be aware that, as a result of the Canterbury earthquakes:

they may be unable to obtain certain types of insurance (eg full replacement cover);
the annual insurance premiums are likely to have increased significantly; and
they may be liable for an excess much higher than the $2,000 set out in the lease.

This reiterates the need for even the Agreement to Lease to accurately reflect the landlord’s specific circumstances.

Lack of Access in an Emergency

New provisions have been included in an attempt to address situations such as the “red zone” in Christchurch where the leased premises were either not damaged or only partly damaged but could not be accessed by the tenant and the lease remained on foot.

In such cases, there is now to be an abatement (reduction) of a fair proportion of rent and outgoings where the tenant is unable to gain access to fully conduct its business because of reasons of safety of the public or the need to prevent any hazard, harm or loss that may be connected with the emergency. These provisions only apply however if the lease has not been cancelled as a result of the premises being totally or substantially destroyed.

The new provisions specifically include as reasons of safety/need to prevent harm:

a restricted access cordon;
prohibition of the use of the premises pending completion of structural engineering or other reports; and
a restriction on occupation of the premises imposed by any competent authority.

In these situations, the lease also now provides that either the landlord or tenant may cancel the lease if access cannot be gained for a period specified in the lease (the default period being nine months) or if the party cancelling can at any time prior to cancellation establish with reasonable certainty that the tenant will be unable to gain access to the premises for that period.

Landlords need to consider their insurance position if rent is abated in circumstances where there is no damage to the premises – i.e. can they in fact cover this risk when most loss of rental policies only respond to actual damage to the premises?

Legal Costs

Previously the tenant was liable to pay the landlord’s costs for the preparation of the lease and any variation or renewal of it. Now each party is to meet their own costs unless the lease specifies otherwise.

The landlord’s costs of providing consent and legal costs relating to enforcement are still chargeable.

Rent reviews

If no rent review date is specified in the lease (again, including the Agreement to Lease), the default position is now that there are no reviews. Previously, the default position had provided for a rent review on each renewal date. There is also no default review upon a lease renewal – again, a review on that date will need to be specified.

In addition, the lease now provides for a choice between market rent review or CPI rent review (or a combination of both throughout the lease term). Both forms of rent review will operate as “ratchets”, even if a CPI rent review follows a market review.

Premises Condition Report

A Fifth Schedule has been attached being a Premises Condition Report which, if completed, provides evidence of the condition of the premises at the commencement date of the lease. The intention is to avoid disputes as to the condition of the premises at the end of the lease.

Outgoings

Clause 16 of the First Schedule provides for an estimate of the Outgoings as at the Commencement Date. This may not always be easy to ascertain with any degree of certainty and it may be prudent to consider deleting this part.

Maintenance and Improvements

The re-decoration clauses in the lease now clarify that replacement items (eg floor coverings) are to be to a same or better quality, specification and appearance as before.

The landlord also now has an express obligation to keep the building weather-proof.

The 6th edition makes it clear that the landlord is responsible for the maintenance and replacement of “building services” – which are those services provided by the landlord as an integral part of the building – e.g. water, gas, electricity, lighting, air conditioning, heating, lifts and escalators etc. The cost of replacing these are not recoverable by the landlord as an outgoing – the rationale being that this is consistent with the expectations of a tenant who pays rent for premises with a level of services enabling that tenant to use the premises for it’s specified business use.

Make good/reinstatement must now occur by the end the lease term – not within a reasonable time thereafter, as had previously been the case.

If the landlord requires access to the premises to comply with the requirements of any statute or regulation (such as bringing a building up to building code) then the tenant must grant such access, but an abatement (reduction) of a fair proportion of rent and outgoings will apply if the tenant’s use of the premises is “materially disrupted”. The landlord can require the tenant to vacate the premises altogether while repairs are being carried out.

There is also a good faith requirement on the part of the landlord, supposedly to ensure that there is reasonable co-operation with the tenant in terms of timing and extent of work. Particularly where upgrades to meet the Building Code are involved, timing may be very important – e.g. avoiding the Christmas season for retailers.

The improvements rent percentage has been deleted, partly out of fear that landlords may try to inappropriately pass expensive building strengthening costs onto tenants under the clause. This does not, of course, stop the parties themselves specifying what terms should apply if building strengthening/improvements are in fact contemplated during the term of the lease.

Related to the above, clause 13 of the Outgoings Schedule now specifies that the costs of upgrading the building to comply with the Building Act 2004 are not an outgoing recoverable from the tenant.

Counterpart clause

A counter part clause is now included which means that, in essence, the Lease can be signed concurrently by the Landlord and the Tenant in their respective lawyers’ offices.

This article is not a substitute for legal advice and you should talk to a lawyer about your specific situation. Please contact Tim Rankin at Parry Field Lawyers (348-8480) timrankin@parryfield.com

The rate of GST is changing on 1 October 2010 to 15%. Get this wrong and it could cost you dearly, especially if you are purchasing or leasing property. This short note covers a couple of important situations that could save you money, in terms of the New Zealand GST Transitional Rules. First we consider the situation where you purchase a property now, but the contract does not become unconditional until after 1 October 2010. This is likely to happen more and more frequently as the time gets closer to 1 October 2010, and will be something to watch out for if you are in the market for a house. This will only apply if you are purchasing from a registered vendor.

The law recognises that in certain events which are beyond the control of a party that it is not fair for that party to have to continue to comply with the contract.

Insurance

Lack of Access in an Emergency

Legal Costs

Rent reviews

Premises Condition Report

Outgoings

Maintenance and Improvements

Counterpart clause

Christchurch CBD

Christchurch – Riccarton

Rolleston

Hokitika

Auckland