New Zealand’s Specialist
Project Lawyers

The new building has been designed by Warren and Mahoney and is a nod to the historic built fabric of the area, while providing for a new iconic and forward looking landmark to invite residents and visitors in to the inner city.

Along with 80 guest suites, the development includes a restaurant, café, bars and a function room to create a thriving space for both guests and local residents alike to assist in the on-going rejuvenation of Invercargill, helping to achieve a key purpose of the Southland Regional Development Strategy.

Given the historic nature of the Inner City, a key element of the project was ensuring that the overall heritage values of the previous corner building on the site were retained in the wider Invercargill. This was achieved through volunteered resource consent conditions, including the establishment of a public heritage fund to assist with the upkeep of other Invercargill heritage buildings. Also included was a condition that the new hotel name pays homage to the history of the site. A public competition is now underway to choose a name that reflects the heritage of the area. Entries can be made by emailing newhotel@ilt.co.nz or submitting entries via the Invercargill Licencing Trust facebook page.

It first looks at a number of the alternative legislative schemes set up in recent years to fast track development (including subdivision), and considers some of the lessons from these examples which may usefully inform future legislation including the much touted but not yet here urban development authority approach.  It touches on the role of, and tools available to, local authorities under the Local Government Act in relation to subdivisions, including the use of development contributions and development agreements to service growth and asks whether our preoccupation with new tools might prevent us from effectively utilising the tools we already have.   
Download the paper here - https://app.box.com/s/58174muot1x5y7b53t8imgxd4d5l5frd

The Draft Plan was released for consultation on 14 November 2018 with submissions due by 5pm on 19 December 2018.  You can find a copy of the draft plan here - http://engage.regeneratechristchurch.nz/accessible-draft-oarc-regeneration-plan-homepage
 

Wellington Partner, Doran Wyatt had the honour of presenting the Greenwood Roche Supreme Award as part of the event on 11 October 2018.

Congratulations to McKee Fehl Constructors Ltd, this year’s winner of the Greenwood Roche Supreme Award, for the Press Hall 80 Willis Street / 22 Boulcott Street project.
 
What stood out for the judges was the ability of McKee Fehl to repurpose and modernise the Press Hall site.  The end result is an iconic development that adds vibrancy to Wellington but also respects the heritage of the original building.
 
The testimonials for this project summed it up:

• “The concept of unlocking Press Hall, which was essentially buried in between Boulcott Street and Willis Street, was a clever idea.”
• “The newly formed urban laneway leading to the food hall is activated by vibrant and diverse kiosks and a bar above, the veranda can now be occupied by people adding to the urban fabric of the street.”
• “Never before have such old, run down, dark and dingy buildings been so substantially structurally modified, seismically upgraded and refurbished to create such an open, vibrant and modern workplace.”

In the judges’ words, “This feels like an iconic development with wide benefit for Wellington”.
 
Congratulations to Maurice Clark and the McKee Fehl team.

Eligible urban development projects will include the provision of new public, affordable and Kiwibuild housing, as well as transport links, commercial and industrial developments, infrastructure and supporting community facilities (schools, pools, open spaces and libraries). The HUDA will also absorb the function of Housing New Zealand as the landlord for public housing in New Zealand. 
 
Read more here: https://app.box.com/s/2kjey5enswm7x08itfis3knzokz67t8o

In the main, the Act is not intended to change our land transfer laws substantially. However, some controversy exists regarding the right of an owner to reclaim title under the manifest injustice provisions, arguably eroding the principle of indefeasibility of title. Also, not all changes promoted during consultation have been adopted, such as placing more onus on mortgagees to verify the identify of their clients, separately defining encumbrances from mortgages, and permitting senior legal executives to certify and sign instruments in Landonline.
 
Some key changes are set out below.
 
New terminology
The Act includes new terminology aimed at modernising the language used. For example, a “certificate of title” and the clumsy “computer freehold/leasehold/interest register” has become the crisper “record of title”, and “registered proprietor” has become “registered owner”. There is also a concept of “replacement lease”, which is a renewed lease or a new lease in substitution for a prior lease between the same parties and relating to the same land.
 
Withholding information for a person’s safety
The Registrar-General of Land is able to refuse to provide a copy of an instrument or a record of title that identifies a person, or to include those details on the register in the first place, if the Register is satisfied that the information discloses or is likely to disclose the person’s location and prejudice their safety.
 
Caveats
There is now an express right for an owner of an estate or interest in land to lodge a caveat against their own title where there is a real risk of fraud.
 
Guaranteed title searches
Guaranteed searches back up the security of the land transfer system, by providing a right to compensation if a purchaser of an interest in a land transaction suffers loss due to the registration of a competing interest. Under the Old Act, the purchaser had to obtain a “guaranteed search” within 14 days before settling the transaction, and had to lodge the transaction documents within 2 months after settlement.
 
The Act updates these periods to reflect the electronic nature of land transactions by:

• requiring that a guaranteed search of the title be obtained within 5 working days before (and including) the settlement date; and
• reducing the period after settlement during which the transaction documents must be lodged at Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) to 20 working days.  

As with the Old Act, no compensation will be payable if the title search disclosed the competing interest.
 
Compensation
Compensation is payable by the Crown when loss occurs in certain circumstances (including, but not exclusively, under the “guaranteed search” situation). Under the Old Act, the calculation for compensation is based on the land value at the time the loss occurred. The Act shifts the date on which compensation is to be assessed to when the claimant “gained (or ought reasonably to have gained) knowledge of the loss”.
 
The Act confirms that the value of the lost estate or interest in land is the “market value”.
 
The High Court may adjust compensation where the amount determined by the prescribed calculation is inadequate or excessive, and may determine at which date the market value should be assessed which may include a revised assessment as at the day of the court judgment.
 
Cancellation of land transactions in cases of “manifest injustice”
The High Court will have limited discretion to order the alteration of titles to avoid “manifest injustice”, but only where compensation or other damages would not properly address the injustice. The High Court may cancel registration of a land transaction and restore title to a person who has been deprived of an estate or interest, or suffered loss, due to that registration. The Court must take into account how the land was acquired, the length of time the parties have owned or occupied the land, the nature of any improvements made, the special characteristics of the land and its significance, and any other relevant circumstances. However, the Court cannot make an order if the estate or interest has subsequently been transferred to a third person acting in good faith.
 
Fraud
Fraud is one of the main exceptions to the indefeasibility of an owner’s title to land. “Fraud”, as an exception to indefeasibility, is now defined as forgery or other dishonest conduct of an owner or agent of an owner in acquiring an estate or interest in land. It is worth noting that, for the purposes of a Court order cancelling a land transaction in the case of “manifest injustice”, the existence of forgery or other dishonest conduct will not itself constitute the required level of injustice.
 
Introduction of covenants in gross and what it means for encumbrances
Until commencement of the Act, it was not possible to register an instrument that contained covenants or promises given by a landowner “in gross” – i.e. in favour of another person, rather than benefiting another parcel of land. Traditionally, these covenants have been included in encumbrances, which are a form of mortgage used for securing a long term obligation to pay a rental (known as a “rent charge”). To reduce the widespread use of encumbrances, the PLA has been amended to allow covenants in gross to be noted on records of title. This has been long awaited and should provide a registration option which is more palatable especially to banks. It also allows affected owners to seek modification or cancellation of existing encumbrances and replace them with covenants in gross.
 
While encumbrances are commonly used as a mechanism to register covenants, they are also properly (but uncommonly) used to register rent charges, and encumbrances are still referred to in the parts of the Act governing mortgages. Encumbrances therefore remain a viable instrument. There are some benefits in using encumbrances over covenants, including exclusion of the covenant modification provisions in the PLA, but, where the real purpose is to require a landowner to do or refrain from doing something for the benefit of another person, a covenant in gross will generally be the appropriate instrument.
 
Registrar’s power to correct titles
The Act clarifies the circumstances in which the Registrar is able to correct titles. The Registrar’s power of correction is now limited to correcting an error made by the Registrar, correcting an error made by a person preparing a document or information for registration, recording a boundary change due to accretion or erosion and giving effect to a court order.
 
Overriding statutes
The Act repeals the Statutory Land Charges Registration Act 1928, with the Act dealing with the registration, priorities and release of relevant charges.
 
Regulations
The Land Transfer Regulations 2002 have also been revoked, with the Land Transfer Regulations 2018 (Regulations) replacing them.
 
One of the key changes made in the Regulations is to update the terms implied into certain classes of easements. These changes include:

• altering the description of the affected land from “servient tenement” to “burdened land” and from “dominant tenement” to “benefited land”;
• referring to the part of the burdened land subject to the easement as the “easement area”, in line with commonly-used wording;
• updating and aligning the equipment that can be installed under the various types of easement;
• removing unnecessary wording, such as replacing the class of easement previously called “telecommunications and computer media” with simply “telecommunications”;
• requiring the owner of the burdened land to act reasonably when the grantee seeks to install easement facilities; and
• adding an implied electricity conveyance right in order to operate equipment installed under the easement powers (eg. a water pump).  

The Regulations also update the core information required to be used in land transaction forms. LINZ has provided template forms, although these remain inconsistent with each other and do not always contain the required core information.
 
New requirements for authority and identity
In conjunction with the Act and the Regulations, LINZ has issued new guidelines for authority and identity and the New Zealand Law Society has issued new authority and instruction forms. The guidelines and forms include greater detail about how clients instruct lawyers and conveyancing practitioners to electronically certify and sign land transfer instruments and how those instructions are required to be confirmed to be valid. In conjunction with the extension of Anti-Money Laundering requirements to lawyers, lawyers now play a key role in confirming that land transactions are free of fraud and other illegal activity.

If you would like further information, please do not hesitate to contact any of our property lawyers. Contact details can be found here.

Congratulations to Nick Flack of Christchurch International Airport, this year’s winner of the Greenwood Roche Young Achiever Award.  Nick is the Asset Planning and Maintenance Manager at Christchurch International Airport, where he has achieved outstanding performance and has made a significant contribution to the planning, construction and on-going maintenance of the Airport’s infrastructure assets.  He has shown focus, dedication and commitment, as well as grit and determination when faced with difficult situations.  He models a collaborative work style that brings together the organisation to translate strategy into action and has the promise of being a future industry leader.

Nick is currently part of the Strategy Action Leadership Group, which is responsible for turning corporate strategy into action.  He has a passion for commercial, operational and master planning as well as for driving long lasting solutions.  He creates clarity of purpose for his teams, articulating the Airport’s property and asset vision and then translating that vision into projects and maintenance plans.

The judges commented on Nick’s determination and motivation to achieve his goals as evidenced by undertaking full time study to complete his Masters in Logistics and Supply Chain Management, whilst also working full time.  He has also been an active member in South Island Logistics Forums, organised personal mentors to help him achieve his goals and completed leadership training, which he has been able to put into practice as part of the Senior Leadership Team.  The work Nick has been involved in has made a significant contribution to the whole of the South Island and the judges were impressed by how Nick sees the big picture, is future focussed and pushes boundaries to achieve his goals.  Nick embodies what this award seeks to recognise and celebrate and is without a doubt a leader of the future.

Congratulations Nick, we look forward to working with you and seeing where your career develop.

Marise manages the legal and intellectual property teams at LIC providing strategic and tactical options on the creation and protection of LIC’s growing portfolio of IP assets.

Greenwood Roche is proud to continue its support of ILANZ and to continue working alongside many of its members, providing pragmatic solutions in the delivery of various projects and initiatives that its members undertake.  In her speech at the awards, Greenwood Roche Partner Ranui Calman highlighted the increasing need for in-house lawyers to be innovative in their thinking, processes and their solutions. 

Greenwood Roche again wishes to congratulates all nominees and award winners on their various achievements throughout the year.