Edmonds Judd

Estate

GST and land transactions

Business & Investment, Commercial, Employment, Estate, Fair Trading, Financial Services Regulation, First Job
0

Understanding your tax obligations

 

If you are buying or selling land (with or without a home on the section), it is important to have an accurate understanding about your tax obligations and whether GST will be applicable to your transaction.

GST is not typically applicable in residential sale and purchase transactions but, if you are GST-registered and the sale is part of your taxable activity, GST may apply.

Potential GST outcomes

If the buyer and seller are both GST-registered, the transfer of land is part of a taxable activity (for example: farming, or a commercial building), and the property is not used as a private residence, the transfers are typically zero-rated for GST (meaning GST is charged on the transaction at a rate of 0%).

If the buyer is GST-registered and the seller is not GST-registered, and the buyer intends to use the land as part of a taxable activity, the buyer may be able to claim GST.

If the seller is GST-registered (and claimed GST) and sells the land to a buyer who is not GST-registered, or does not intend to use the land as part of a taxable activity, the seller may need to return GST to Inland Revenue following the sale.

There can be additional complications where some part of the property is used for private purposes, and some part is used for a taxable activity. In this instance, some of the purchase price may be subject to GST, but some part of it may not.

Warranty as to GST status

The standard sale and purchase of real estate agreement contains a statement on the front page – ‘the vendor is registered under the GST Act in respect of this transaction and/or will be so registered at settlement.’

If you are GST-registered and the sale is a taxable supply, you will need to complete schedule one in the agreement. As a seller, you will need to tick either ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to this statement. You must provide a warranty that the answer you provide is correct and will remain correct as at settlement. If it later transpires that your answer was incorrect, you have breached a warranty and could be liable to the buyer for any losses they have suffered because of this breach. For example, if you provided a warranty that you were not GST-registered in relation to the transaction, the buyer may presume that they may claim GST from Inland Revenue following settlement if they will be GST-registered and intend to use the property for taxable supply. If you were, in fact, GST-registered, the buyer will not be able to do that, therefore you may be required to reimburse 15% of the purchase price to the buyer due to your breach of warranty.

If you are the buyer, the agreement contemplates your GST status potentially changing throughout the transaction. For example, you may initially sign the agreement in your personal name (and you are not GST-registered) and later you nominate a GST-registered company to complete the purchase.

The purchase price will be expressed as either ‘plus GST (if any)’ or ‘inclusive of GST (if any),’ which dictates how much you need to pay on settlement, depending on your GST status. It should be clear to all parties whether the buyer will be GST-registered on settlement date, as this can have GST implications for both parties.

Purchase price allocation

If GST is applicable to the transaction, you should consider whether you should agree with the other party on a purchase price allocation; completing a purchase price allocation is highly recommended in some situations since GST may be claimable on some items, but not others.

If the buyer and seller agree on a purchase price allocation in the agreement, this allocation must be used by both the seller and buyer when completing their respective tax returns. This provides certainty to both parties. The purchase price allocation can therefore have tax consequences for both buyer and seller, so it is important to get accounting advice on this allocation before signing the agreement.

Where to from here?

If GST is (or may be) applicable to your transaction, it is important that you get legal and accounting advice before signing the agreement. A mistake in the agreement cannot always be fixed by your professional advisers after signing; it could result in an unexpected GST bill, which can be very costly. We and your accountant will work together to ensure that the sale and purchase agreement accurately reflects your GST position and that you fully understand any potential tax consequences before signing the agreement.

 

 

 

 

[1] Purchase price allocation is where the price is allocated between the land and any buildings, and other fixtures, fittings, chattels or improvements.

DISCLAIMER: All the information published in Property Speaking is true and accurate to the best of the authors’ knowledge. It should not be a substitute for legal advice. No liability is assumed by the authors or publisher for losses suffered by any person or organisation relying directly or indirectly on this newsletter. Views expressed are those of individual authors, and do not necessarily reflect the view of Edmonds Judd. Articles appearing in Property Speaking may be reproduced with prior approval from the editor and credit given to the source.
Copyright, NZ LAW Limited, 2022.     Editor: Adrienne Olsen.       E-mail: [email protected].       Ph: 029 286 3650

 

Life Stage – First Home

Economy & Finance, Employment, Estate, House, Media, News, Online, Uncategorized
0

It felt like Bob’s life had been turned upside down. Not only had his father, Steve, passed away recently leaving him upset and overwhelmed, but his burger bar business was also struggling. Bob had put all his life savings into his burger bar, which he opened 6 months prior. Further adding to the stress, Bob currently did not have a home. He had been couch-surfing at friends places while he saved up enough to rent a place of his own.

 

After a few difficult months, Steve’s estate was finally settled. As one of the beneficiaries, Bob received a substantial inheritance. Though the money offered some relief, Bob knew he needed to use it wisely. His first step: finding a home. He realised that in order to take care of his business and himself, he needed a stable place to live and rest, putting him in a better frame of mind to make smart business decisions.

 

As Bob now had more funds than he had expected to receive from years of working, he decided this was the right time to buy a property rather than rent. He browsed listings on local real estate websites and soon found a small, tidy place in a quiet neighbourhood—within his budget and close to his burger bar.

 

He decided to call his lawyer and ask for the things he should consider before making an offer. His lawyer guided him through several key considerations:

 

  1. Conditions in the Sale and Purchase Agreement: He needed to decide whether he wanted to include conditions in the agreement. He already had the funds available for the purchase so he did not need to make it conditional on finance. Bob did not realise that he could also include other conditions such as a LIM report, builders report, and toxicology report. Bob decided to include each of these as it was better to make sure there were no big issues before being locked in a deal.

 

  1. KiwiSaver: If Bob has KiwiSaver funds, he would need to fill out an application to withdraw the funds from his provider. He would need a solicitor to witness him signing this as it could not be left until the last minute.

 

  1. Insurance: The lawyer stressed to Bob the importance of checking he could obtain insurance cover for the property prior to going unconditional. Also, if there were any issues under the builders report / LIM report / toxicology report, he would need to disclose said issues with his insurer.

–

  1. Relationship Property: Bob had not had the time to date with everything going on but was made aware to obtain advice in this regard once he had a partner in the future.

 

Bob took all the advice into consideration and obtained all recommended reports. Within weeks, his purchase when unconditional, and weeks after, settled.

 

Bob was beyond happy, he now felt as though he had the stability he had been searching for. This feeling lasted only a few minutes though as Bob was about to receive a call in relation to his business that would change everything…

 

 

Macayla Brdanovic 

 

 

Estate Planning and the Unexpected: A Family Law Story

Employment, Estate, Health Issues, House, Latest news, Social Media, Trusts
0

A tear trickled down Luke’s face as the hearse carrying his late father, Steve, drove away from the funeral home and down the road. It had been a beautiful service and his brother Bob, who owned a burger bar, provided some excellent catering. Steve had been a wonderful father, and had prepared for this moment by getting his Will and Enduring Power of Attorney sorted out nice and early.

As Steve’s executor, Luke immediately set about administering his father’s estate. It was an immense job, so he enlisted the assistance of Edmonds Judd. They met with him and explained the administration process and gathered from him an idea of Steve’s assets and liabilities. They applied to the High Court for Probate and contacted the banks, insurers and real estate agent on Luke’s behalf. They found the odd liability, such as a small credit card debt, and closed any outstanding accounts.

Luke was relieved. This was starting to look easy!

He put down the phone after talking to his helpful solicitor and poured himself a nice cup of tea. Then, just as he was sitting down, he heard a knock on the door.

“Who could that be?” he wondered aloud. He wasn’t too surprised, as he had had many callers recently offering their condolences. He was surprised however, to open the door to see himself staring back at him. Luke blinked in surprise.

“Luke”, the doppelganger said. “I am your brother. Your long-lost twin brother, as a matter of fact. I was adopted when we were just babies. I’m guessing from the look on your face that Steve never told you?”

Luke was shocked. The stranger was indeed identical to him, right down to the freckles on his nose and the way he turned up the cuff on his jeans. The stranger continued.

“My name is Han, and it’s nice to meet you. Listen, I know this is awkward timing, but my understanding is that Steve left behind a sizable estate. I’m going to need to some of that money, as I have significant gambling debts I need to pay off. That won’t be a problem, right? After all, it’s only right that I get a slice of the pie”.

Luke invited Han in for a drink, and pondered what to do next. Once Han had taken a few old photos of Steve and left, Luke picked up the phone and called his solicitor back, explaining the whole thing. His solicitor was very helpful.

“You see Luke, sometimes children who are left out of their parent’s Will can make a claim under the Family Protection Act 1955. The law says that parents have a moral duty to provide for their children. However, because Han was adopted out as a child, he won’t be able to successfully make a claim. The Adoption Act 1955 changes the legal relationship between adopted child and birth parent. Steve did not have to provide for Han in his Will”.

“I don’t know,” said Luke. “Is it really fair that Han not get anything out of the Estate?”

“Well, if you and the other beneficiaries of the Estate feel that way, you can enter what’s called a Deed of Family Arrangement”. It would record that the beneficiaries have come to an agreement to do something different to what’s in the Will, and that would allow us to make a distribution to Han. You would need to get all of the beneficiaries to agree, though”.

Luke thanked his solicitor and hung up the phone. He had a lot to think about. He decided to give his brother Bob a call, to see what he thought. But Bob was having his own problems at his burger bar…

 

Jamie Graham

Steve’s Big Decision: He’s ready for the next chapter – Retirement

Estate, Health Issues, House, Kids, Latest news, Media, Property, Relationships, Retirement
0

Brought to you by Edmonds Judd – Your Life Your Lawyers

 

Steve has spent the last 45 years building a life he was proud of—raising a family, growing his business, and working hard every step of the way. But now, for the first time in decades, he was thinking about something new: retirement.

 

The thought was both exciting and overwhelming. Should he downsize to a smaller home? Maybe move into a retirement village? What about his Will—did he have one and if so, was it up to date? And who would make decisions for him if one day he couldn’t?

 

That’s when Steve decided it was time to talk to someone who understood the journey ahead—someone who specialised in elder law.

 

At Edmonds Judd, Steve found the guidance he needed. The team took the time to sit down with him, listen to his concerns, and explain everything. This helped Steve put a clear, confident plan in place—updating his Will, setting up Enduring Powers of Attorney, and walking through the legal details of retirement village living. Most importantly, they made sure Steve’s wishes—and his family—were protected.

 

Steve created an estate plan that matched his life now—not the one he had twenty years ago. Steve knew that his family would be protected, and that his wishes would be carried out no matter what the future held.

 

He learned that retirement planning wasn’t just about money—it was about peace of mind.

 

“It’s not just legal paperwork,” Steve told his children Luke and Sally one evening, “It’s making sure you’re all taken care of, no matter what.”

 

Thanks to Edmonds Judd, Steve now looks forward to his next chapter in his life with confidence and clarity.

Rachael Beattie

Emissions Trading Scheme

Commercial, Employment, Estate, First Job, Health Issues, Online, Property
0

A change in approach?

The Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) will turn 17 years old in September. An integral part of the Climate Change Response (Emissions Trading) Amendment Act 2008, the ETS has undergone significant change throughout its existence.

 

What is the ETS?

The ETS is New Zealand’s main tool for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. It essentially works by requiring participating businesses to measure and report on their greenhouse gas emissions. Businesses that participate in the scheme must surrender what is known as an ‘emissions unit’ for each tonne of carbon dioxide that they emit. One tonne of CO2 will cost you one emissions unit.

Over time, the government will reduce the number of units that are supplied into the ETS. The effect of this is that emissions units increase in demand as participating businesses buy and sell emissions units from each other. The price of emissions units in the ETS will (in theory) trend upwards, helping New Zealand to steadily move towards the goal of being a net zero emitter of greenhouse gas by 2050.

 

Recent developments in the ETS

There has been some concern regarding the conversion of productive farmland into forestry in order to gain emissions units. The government has announced changes to the ETS; its aim is to strike a balance between achieving New Zealand’s climate goals, and protecting the longevity of our most profitable farmland.

The government has signalled that the proposed changes to the ETS will be formally introduced to the House this year, with the new rules expected to come into force by October 2025.

 

All trees created equal?

The most significant proposed change to the ETS is the temporary prohibition of the registration of exotic forestry (non-native) for emissions units on Land Use Capability (LUC) 1–5 farmland. LUC separates land into eight categories based on an assessment of the land’s capability for use. LUC Class 1 land is the most versatile, with LUC Class 8 land being the least versatile.

At present, any tree can be planted on any farmland to earn emissions units (provided the tree species planted can reach at least five metres in height). This means there is no incentive to prioritise the planting of native trees over the planting of exotic species, such as the Radiata pine.

The proposed changes will also require ETS participants to exercise greater discretion in choosing which areas of farmland to plant on; should you wish to plant an exotic species, you must do so on your less productive land.

 

A flexible approach

The proposed rules are not entirely hard and fast as there is some wriggle room for ETS participants. Up to 25% of LUC Class 1–6 land on a farm can be used to plant exotic forestry for the purpose of registering it under the ETS.

The proposed new rules have also scrapped plans to include agricultural processors (meat processors, dairy processors, nitrogen fertiliser manufacturers and importers, live animal exporters) in the ETS. Agricultural processors had been due to enter the ETS from 1 January 2025, but the passing of the Climate Change Response (Emissions Trading Scheme Agricultural Obligations) Amendment Bill on 26 November 2024 has stopped this.

 

Why the changes?

The proposed changes clearly signal the government’s desire to promote the planting of native species. It appears, however, that consideration has been given to the idea that ETS participants have benefitted from the planting of exotic species that can be planted en masse and grow quickly. This practice will remain, with the caveat being that it will need to take place on less productive farmland.

DISCLAIMER: All the information published in Property Speaking is true and accurate to the best of the authors’ knowledge. It should not be a substitute for legal advice. No liability is assumed by the authors or publisher for losses suffered by any person or organisation relying directly or indirectly on this newsletter. Views expressed are those of individual authors, and do not necessarily reflect the view of Edmonds Judd. Articles appearing in Property Speaking may be reproduced with prior approval from the editor and credit given to the source.
Copyright, NZ LAW Limited, 2022.     Editor: Adrienne Olsen.       E-mail: [email protected].       Ph: 029 286 3650

 

A loved one has lost capacity, now what?

Employment, Estate, First Job, House, Kids, Media, News, Property, Relationships, Retirement
0

What happens if your loved one loses mental capacity due to illness or accident?  Who will make decisions about whether they need to go into care?  Who can manage their finances to pay for their medical costs and living costs?

 

Hopefully your loved one has enduring powers of attorney in place appointing people to make decisions about their welfare and property.  But what if there are no enduring powers of attorney?

 

In that case, you will need to apply to the Family Court for orders under the Protection of Personal and Property Rights Act 1988 (PPPR).  There are various types of court orders that can be made appointing one or more people to manage someone else’s affairs.  Deciding which court orders to apply for depends on the circumstances and needs of the person who has lost capacity.

 

Before applying to the court, you should be aware of the strict legal obligations and responsibilities you will have if appointed, and that the court will have ongoing oversight to ensure affairs are being managed appropriately.

 

While it may cost a few hundred dollars to get enduring powers of attorney while someone is healthy, it can cost a few thousand dollars to get court orders if  they lose capacity there are no enduring powers of attorney in place.  So, it is a good idea to encourage your loved ones to get enduring powers of attorney while they are still healthy.

Kerry Bowler, Solicitor Kerry Bowler

Disinheriting your children

Estate, Kids, Property, Relationships, Trusts
0

Can it be done?

In New Zealand, people making wills have a great deal of freedom to dispose of their assets as they wish. If, however, a will-maker entirely excludes some close family members from their will, those people will often have claims against the will-maker’s estate.

In the recent case of what is known as the Alphabet case,[1] an abusive father tried to use a trust to disinherit his children on his death.

 

 

Family Protection Act 1955

The Family Protection Act 1955 is designed to protect family members who have been excluded from a will or left without adequate provision. It allows certain groups of people (including spouses, partners and children) to claim against an estate for further provision.

The court follows a two-step approach when evaluating claims under the Act. First, it must decide whether the will-maker owed a duty to the claimant and, if so, whether that duty has been breached. Second, the court must consider what is required to remedy the breach.

The court takes a conservative approach in making awards for further provision. It will do no more than the minimum that it believes is necessary to address any breach of duty. There is no presumption of equal sharing between children, and the court will not rewrite a will based on its own perception of fairness. There is no formula, however, for assessing what is required to remedy a breach; each case depends on its own facts.

Important factors will include the size of the estate, the claimant’s personal circumstances and other competing claims (such as from siblings or a parent/stepparent). In many cases, however, a financially stable adult child might expect to receive 10–15% of a parent’s estate. That could increase if a child is in poor circumstances or has suffered abuse at the hands of their parent.

 

 

Making a successful claim

When a successful claim is made under the Act, the award will be paid from the deceased’s estate. That necessarily means that claims are limited by the size of the estate. If a will-maker has gifted or transferred assets to a trust during their lifetime, or to other people, their estate may have little or nothing left in it. This has the effect of preventing estate claims because there is no estate available.

In the Alphabet case, an abusive father transferred his assets into a trust. His children wanted to bring claims against his estate, but there was nothing in it. They argued that they should effectively be able to unwind the transfer of assets to the trust, so that those assets went back into their father’s estate, and they could bring claims under the Act. This case went all the way to the Supreme Court.

 

 

Alphabet case

In the Alphabet case, the deceased father was referred to as Robert, and his children as Alice, Barry and Cliff. Alice, Barry and Cliff experienced egregious abuse at Robert’s hands and, understandably, did not have a relationship with him.

Robert took deliberate action during his lifetime to transfer most of his assets to a trust. None of his children were beneficiaries of that trust.

Alice, Barry and Cliff argued that Robert owed them fiduciary duties as a parent, and that he breached those duties when he abused them. They argued that the abuse created an ongoing fiduciary obligation which Robert breached when he transferred his assets into a trust. They argued that the transfer of assets could (and should) be unwound on this basis, and Robert’s assets returned to his estate; this would allow them to make claims under the Act.

Fiduciary duties are duties to put someone else’s interests before your own. They usually arise in relationships of particular trust and confidence. The Supreme Court acknowledged the existence of fiduciary duties between a parent and a minor child, but it found that these duties ended when the parent’s caregiving responsibilities ceased. It did not agree that there remained a fiduciary duty owing later on which would prevent Robert transferring his assets to a trust.

The court noted that the Act does not contain any mechanism to ‘claw back’ assets which have been put in a trust or transferred to another person in order to avoid estate claims. It noted that this might be the subject of future law reform but it was not existing law.

Robert’s three children therefore failed in their attempt to bring assets back into Robert’s estate, on which they could then have made Family Protection Act claims.

 

 

Law Commission

The Law Commission recently prepared a comprehensive review of succession law. It proposed that some form of anti-avoidance, or ‘claw back’ provision, be included in any law reform efforts that would address situations such as the Alphabet case.

While the government has considered the Law Commission’s report, it has not yet taken any steps to progress law reform efforts. For the time being, this means trusts may continue to be used in order to prevent some potential estate claims, particularly those brought by children.

[1] A, B and C v D and E Limited as Trustees of the Z Trust [2024] NZSC 161

 

 

DISCLAIMER: All the information published in Trust eSpeaking is true and accurate to the best of the authors’ knowledge. It should not be a substitute for legal advice. No liability is assumed by the authors or publisher for losses suffered by any person or organisation relying directly or indirectly on this newsletter. Views expressed are those of individual authors, and do not necessarily reflect the view of Edmonds Judd. Articles appearing in Trust eSpeaking may be reproduced with prior approval from the editor and credit given to the source.
Copyright, NZ LAW Limited, 2022.     Editor: Adrienne Olsen.       E-mail: [email protected].       Ph: 029 286 3650

Why should I look at my will?

Estate, Kids, Property, Relationships, Retirement
0

Review at life’s milestones

You should review and update your will regularly. It is not something that, once done, you should just stick in a drawer and forget about. There are many significant milestones in life when you should think about whether your will is still appropriate for your unique circumstances.

 

If you don’t often review your will, particularly after important life milestones, you may discover (or worse, your family may discover after your death) that your will does not leave everything the way you intended. This means that certain people or causes may miss out on an inheritance or a gift in your will. Also, out-of-date wills can cause significant complications for the people involved in the management and distribution of your estate.

 

With the summer holidays coming up and some time away from the treadmill of daily life, this is an ideal time to review your will.

 

Buying a home is a milestone

Many people make a will when buying their first home. Although there is no reason why you cannot make a will before then, this is often the trigger when it feels like you have something significant to leave in your will. If you buy your home with someone else, usually you will want to leave the house to that person when you die. However, this is not always the case, particularly if you are not in a romantic relationship with that person.

 

If you have children from a previous relationship, you may want to ensure your partner can continue living in the house when you die but, ultimately, you want your children to inherit your share of the house. You may have borrowed money from other family members to help with the purchase that you need to repay first. Your will should be carefully drafted to make sure it truly reflects your intentions.

 

Joint ownership vs tenants in common: The ownership structure of your home, or any asset for that matter, is also very important to understand. ‘Jointly owned’ assets pass to the surviving owner/s when one owner dies. Assets which are owned as ‘tenants in common’ remain part of a person’s estate when they die and will be distributed under that person’s will.

 

Many people are not sure, or forget what type of ownership they have, especially if their house was bought many years ago. If you are unsure, or the ownership structure of your asset/s changes, you should review your will to make sure that everything will still be distributed as you want after your death. You should also review the ownership structure at the same time.

 

Marriage, separation and divorce

Getting married, separated or divorced are all events that have a significant effect on how your will might operate when you die. If you have a will and subsequently get married or enter into a civil union, your will is automatically revoked, unless your will is specifically worded as being in contemplation of that marriage or civil union. If it is not, you could effectively be left without a valid will, even though you have made one in the past.

 

In the case of a separation order or divorce, your existing will is not revoked but the law states that your spouse or partner is treated as having died immediately before you. This means any gifts to them will be void and, instead, any backup provisions in your will would come into effect. You should update your will after a separation or divorce to ensure that it will operate as you intend.

 

It is also important to know that the simple act of ‘breaking up’ with someone is not enough to have gifts to that person automatically voided. You should take the additional steps of obtaining a formal separation order or an order dissolving the marriage, and reviewing your will. If not, you could be left in the awkward situation of leaving everything in your will to your ex-spouse or partner – which may be a very unpalatable idea for some!

 

Birth or adoption of children

There’s a lot to think about when welcoming a child into your family and a review of your will may not be high up on the to do list. Your will should, however, assign guardianship of your children and account for their future needs, particularly if your child has special needs requiring a higher level of assistance. If there is a significant age gap between your children or you have children from different relationships, your will may need to be tailored to account for this.

 

Death of an executor, beneficiary or guardian

Executors are the people you name in your will to manage and distribute your estate when you die. A will-maker will often appoint a family member or someone to whom they are very close to carry out this role. It is important to have an executor who you trust who will do a good job.

The death of an executor, beneficiary or a guardian of your young children means your will may not work as intended or could create confusion. Do review your will if this happens or should your executor’s circumstances or health change.

 

Significant changes in financial position

Receiving a large inheritance or a significant capital gain on, say, property or business assets (or perhaps winning Lotto!) can significantly alter how you want your estate to be distributed when you die. You may decide to include additional beneficiaries – perhaps more distant family members or friends, or leave a gift to a charity that you care passionately about.

Although it’s not always the case, estates of relatively higher value are often more complex and require greater planning to ensure that everything runs smoothly when you die.

 

What if I don’t have a will?

If you die without a will (called an ‘intestacy’), your assets will be distributed according to the default rules established by law. Depending on your circumstances and who survives you, your assets would usually go to some combination of your spouse or de facto partner, children, parents and siblings. Even if some family members are estranged from you, they could still receive something from your estate under the default rules.

 

Other milestones

The milestones we have noted above for reviewing your will are not exhaustive. Starting a business, having a KiwiSaver account, moving countries, changes in your health and amendments to the law are all good reasons to look at updating your will.

 

If it’s been a while since you’ve looked at your will, we hope this article gives you the impetus to pull it out of that drawer and dust it off. Better yet, talk with us about it so you can have peace of mind knowing that, when you die, your loved ones will be taken care of as you wish.

 

 

 

DISCLAIMER: All the information published in Fineprint is true and accurate to the best of the authors’ knowledge. It should not be a substitute for legal advice. No liability is assumed by the authors or publisher for losses suffered by any person or organisation relying directly or indirectly on this newsletter. Views expressed are those of individual authors, and do not necessarily reflect the view of Edmonds Judd. Articles appearing in Fineprint may be reproduced with prior approval from the editor and credit given to the source.
Copyright, NZ LAW Limited, 2022.     Editor: Adrienne Olsen.       E-mail: [email protected].       Ph: 029 286 3650

Wait! Before you sign that pre-nup!

Estate, House, Property, Relationships
0

Three key steps before signing

There are many reasons for couples to contract out of the equal sharing provisions of the Relationship Property Act (RPA).

You and your partner are off to have the lawyer draw up a quick document and sign it.  But the law says, “Woah there, partner! There’s a lot more to it (131 pages to be precise!), you should definitely get legal advice to check it’s what you want first.”

The RPA states that your contracting out agreement is void unless before you sign, you receive advice from an independent lawyer on the effects and implications the agreement has on your property rights under the RPA.

There are three key steps you must take before signing a contracting out agreement for it to be valid:

  1. Independent lawyers: You must each have your own independent lawyer. Generally, this means the lawyer advising you on contracting out should not have previously acted for your partner.
  2. Disclosure: Through lawyers you and your partner exchange statements showing balances and values of all assets and liabilities. If significant property is not disclosed there is a risk that a court could overturn the agreement.
  3. Advice: Once your lawyer has the details of all property owned by each of you, they can assess what your rights would be if that property were divided under the RPA. They can then provide you with advice on how the agreement affects your property rights and the implications for you if property was divided under the agreement.

This article is the first in a series of four by litigation solicitor, Kerry Bowler.

 

 

Kerry Bowler, solicitor

Resting in peace? Where your Will might fall short

Estate, Health Issues, Kids, Retirement
0

No one likes to contemplate their death. If we do think about the unthinkable, we like to hope that we will go as peacefully as possible with nothing left to worry about. Adequate estate planning can save your loved ones a great deal of time, money and stress while they are grieving you.

Part of your estate planning might include deciding what you want to happen to your remains after death. You may wish for your body to be interred in a family plot, have your ashes scattered somewhere special or have your remains disposed of in accordance with your cultural practices.

It may come as some shock then, that while your Will can contain instructions regarding your remains, these instructions are not necessarily binding. This can be a problem when your executors and members of your family are at odds as to what to do with your remains.

In New Zealand, the executor has both the right and the duty to make decisions about the remains of the deceased. However, there are a range of different factors that the executor needs to consider when making their decision, including cultural, religious and spiritual practices as well as the views of immediate and wider family. If it can be shown that the executor did not take all relevant considerations into account, then there may be grounds for the executor’s decision to be challenged in court.

Your wishes are of course relevant, but your executor may (and is entitled to) weigh your wishes up against any other factors that your wider family raises.

To hopefully avoid any disagreements and potential litigation after you have passed, you may wish to have a conversation with your executors and your loved ones now. This helps ensure everyone is on the same page about what should happen following your death and increases the likelihood that the wishes you record in your Will will be followed.

Edmonds Judd can assist you with this by drafting your Will and providing advice about your estate planning.

Jamie Graham, Law Clerk