1 London Street, Hamilton

07 838 2079

Publications

Invalidity of Wills

By Melissa Gibson - December 2018

Recent cases have outlined important considerations regarding the requirements necessary to prove a Will to be invalid. There is some confusion around the grounds upon which a Will can be challenged, leading to unnecessary costs in questioning the validity of a Will.

Read more…

Greenpeace: Charitable status decision

By Melissa Gibson - December 2018

The recent decision by the Independent Charities Registration Board (“the Board”) that Greenpeace does not qualify for charitable status provides further guidance for charities regarding political purposes, ancillary purposes, and illegal purposes.

Read more…

Will Kits: DIY gone wrong?

By Natalie Whitelock - November 2018

Online wills or do it yourself will kits seem to be a popular new trend. Natalie discusses the recent case of Mills v Laboyrie [2018] NZHC 1368 where the question before the High Court was whether or not a partially completed will from a will kit satisfied section 14 of the Wills Act 2007.

Read more…

How the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering of Financing of Terrorism Act 2009 law affects our clients

October 2018

New Zealand has passed a law called the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Act 2009. The purpose of the law reflects New Zealand's commitment to the international initiative to counter the impact that criminal activity has on people and economies within the global community. From 1 July 2018 lawyers must comply with the recent changes to the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Act 2009 whereby law firms are required to undertake certain background checks before providing services to their clients.

Read more…

Farm failure and family fallout leads to Supreme Court ruling on prejudiced shareholders provision

By Amanda Hockley - October 2018

Baker v Hodder [2018] NZSC 78 deals with important company law issues, and at the highest level. In a sadly familiar set of facts, this case concerned a farming business run on land owned by a family company which was unsuccessful and ultimately became insolvent, forcing the sale of the farm. It is worth noting as it is the first decision by the Supreme Court on the ‘prejudiced shareholders provision’, contained in section 174 of the Companies Act.

Read more…