GML Lawyers… https://www.gmllawyers.co.nz/ We offer wide range of legal services for individuals, families & business clients Sun, 26 Feb 2023 21:35:36 +0000 en-NZ hourly 1 https://www.gmllawyers.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/cropped-Favicon-v1-32x32.png GML Lawyers… https://www.gmllawyers.co.nz/ 32 32 223368210 Directors not providing information to Shareholders https://www.gmllawyers.co.nz/directors-not-providing-information-to-shareholders/ Sun, 26 Feb 2023 21:31:44 +0000 https://www.gmllawyers.co.nz/?p=2294 In New Zealand, the Companies Act 1993 (the Act) sets out the rights and obligations of directors, shareholders, and other stakeholders in relation to company management and decision-making. Among other things, the Act includes provisions that address the disclosure of information to shareholders and the resolution of disputes between shareholders. One of the key obligations […]

The post Directors not providing information to Shareholders appeared first on GML Lawyers....

]]>
In New Zealand, the Companies Act 1993 (the Act) sets out the rights and obligations of directors, shareholders, and other stakeholders in relation to company management and decision-making. Among other things, the Act includes provisions that address the disclosure of information to shareholders and the resolution of disputes between shareholders.

One of the key obligations of directors under the Act is to act in good faith and in the best interests of the company as a whole. This includes an obligation to provide shareholders with accurate and timely information about the company’s financial position and performance. Directors who fail to disclose material information to shareholders or who provide false or misleading information may be in breach of their duties under the Act and may be held personally liable for any losses suffered by the company or its shareholders as a result.

In addition to their duties under the Act, directors may also be subject to other legal obligations to disclose information to shareholders, such as the requirement to disclose any material contracts or transactions that the company is a party to, or any material changes in the company’s financial position or prospects.

If a director fails to disclose such information to shareholders, a shareholder may be able to bring a claim against the director for breach of their duties under the Act or for any losses suffered as a result of the non-disclosure.

There are several legal remedies available to shareholders in such cases, including:

  • Seeking an injunction to prevent the director from continuing to breach their duties or from disposing of any assets that may be needed to compensate the shareholder for any losses suffered.
  • Seeking damages from the director for any losses suffered as a result of the non-disclosure.
  • Applying to the court to have the director removed from office.
  • Bringing a derivative action on behalf of the company to seek compensation for any losses suffered as a result of the non-disclosure.

In addition to these legal remedies, the Act also provides for alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms to assist in the resolution of disputes between shareholders. These include:

  • Mediation: This is a voluntary process in which a neutral third party assists the parties to a dispute to reach a mutually acceptable settlement.
  • Expert determination: This is a process in which an expert is appointed to make a binding decision on a specific issue in a dispute.
  • Arbitration: This is a formal process in which a neutral third party makes a binding decision on the dispute.

The Act also provides for the appointment of a shareholder representative to act on behalf of a group of shareholders in relation to a dispute. This can be an effective way for minority shareholders to protect their interests when dealing with a majority shareholder.

In summary, the Companies Act 1993 (nz) provides a range of legal remedies and ADR mechanisms for shareholders to resolve disputes with directors and other shareholders. It is important for shareholders to seek legal advice and consider their options carefully before pursuing any legal action in relation to a dispute with a director or other shareholder.

The post Directors not providing information to Shareholders appeared first on GML Lawyers....

]]>
2294
The Companies Act 1993 and shareholder Disputes https://www.gmllawyers.co.nz/the-companies-act-1993-and-shareholder-disputes/ Sun, 26 Feb 2023 20:46:30 +0000 https://www.gmllawyers.co.nz/?p=2288 The post The Companies Act 1993 and shareholder Disputes appeared first on GML Lawyers....

]]>

The Companies Act 1993 (NZ) is the primary legislation that regulates the formation, operation, and dissolution of companies in New Zealand. One of the key aspects of the Act is the provisions it includes to address disputes between shareholders. These provisions aim to provide a framework for resolving conflicts and preserving the stability of the company.

Section 131 of the Act outlines the general principle that shareholders are entitled to have their interests fairly and reasonably represented in the management and conduct of the company. This includes the right to participate in the decision-making process and to receive adequate information about the company’s affairs.

If a shareholder believes that their rights are not being respected or that the company is not being managed in their best interests, they can raise a complaint or dispute with the company’s directors or management.

The Act provides a number of options for shareholders to seek resolution of their concerns, including:

  • Mediation: The Act encourages the use of mediation as a means of resolving disputes in a cost-effective and timely manner. Mediation is a form of alternative dispute resolution in which a neutral third party helps the parties to reach an agreement.
  • Shareholders’ meetings: The Act allows shareholders to call a special meeting to discuss and vote on specific issues, including disputes. Shareholders can also request that the company’s directors put a resolution on the agenda of the next annual general meeting.
  • Court proceedings: If a dispute cannot be resolved through other means, shareholders can seek a legal remedy through the courts. This may involve seeking an injunction to stop the company from taking certain actions, or seeking damages if the company has acted improperly.

The Act also includes provisions relating to the removal of directors, which can be an effective means of resolving disputes between shareholders and management. Section 168 of the Act allows shareholders to remove a director by passing a special resolution at a meeting of shareholders. The director must be given the opportunity to be heard before the resolution is passed, and the removal must be justified on the grounds of misconduct, incompetence, or a lack of good faith.

In addition to these provisions, the Act also sets out rules for the management and operation of companies, including the duties and responsibilities of directors, the requirement for financial reporting, and the procedures for making decisions. These rules aim to ensure that the company is run in a transparent and accountable manner and that shareholders are able to exercise their rights effectively.

Overall, the Companies Act 1993 (NZ) provides a comprehensive framework for addressing disputes between shareholders and promoting the smooth operation of companies in New Zealand. By providing a range of options for resolving conflicts, the Act helps to ensure that shareholder interests are protected and that the company is able to function effectively.

The post The Companies Act 1993 and shareholder Disputes appeared first on GML Lawyers....

]]>
2288
Full and frank disclosure in matters relationship a must https://www.gmllawyers.co.nz/full-and-frank-disclosure-in-matters-relationship-a-must/ Sun, 26 Feb 2023 20:42:31 +0000 https://www.gmllawyers.co.nz/?p=2286 At GML Lawyers, we advise clients on the importance of providing clear, full, and frank disclosure in any relationship property matter, whether you are negotiating an agreement following a separation, going through court proceedings, or preparing a contracting out (pre-nuptial) agreement. We do this in order to avoid the risk that the settlement could be […]

The post Full and frank disclosure in matters relationship a must appeared first on GML Lawyers....

]]>
At GML Lawyers, we advise clients on the importance of providing clear, full, and frank disclosure in any relationship property matter, whether you are negotiating an agreement following a separation, going through court proceedings, or preparing a contracting out (pre-nuptial) agreement. We do this in order to avoid the risk that the settlement could be challenged in the future.

The Family Court has the power to set aside a relationship property agreement if giving effect to it would cause “serious injustice,” and there have been many cases where non-disclosure of relevant financial information and circumstances has led to this outcome. If the Court makes final orders for the division of relationship property, but it is later discovered that one party made a material non-disclosure, it may be possible for the orders to be set aside.

Proper negotiation is not possible without full disclosure, and at GML Lawyers, we can help you to apply to the Court for “discovery” if there is a concern that disclosure is not forthcoming. Lack of disclosure can have serious consequences, as demonstrated by cases where agreements have been overturned or challenged due to a failure to disclose relevant information.

When dividing relationship property by way of agreement, it is important to disclose and accurately record values for items of property and debts. In one case, a party failed to disclose accurate values for shares in a company, leading to a lengthy court battle and the imposition of costs.

Honesty is crucial in negotiations, and at GML Lawyers, we believe it is essential to have full confidence in the other party’s honesty about values. If there are doubts about honesty, it may be advisable to seek legal advice. Our team at GML Lawyers is here to assist you with all aspects of relationship property matters and ensure that you are protected throughout the process.

The post Full and frank disclosure in matters relationship a must appeared first on GML Lawyers....

]]>
2286
Landlord rights and duties when selling a rental property https://www.gmllawyers.co.nz/landlord-rights-and-duties-when-selling-a-rental-property/ Sat, 06 Mar 2021 11:06:08 +0000 https://www.gmllawyers.co.nz/?p=2190 The post Landlord rights and duties when selling a rental property appeared first on GML Lawyers....

]]>

The Residential Tenancies Amendment Act 2020 was passed in August of last year, promising significant changes to tenancy law and the original Residential Tenancies Act 1986. However, most of the changes have only recently come into force.

As of 11 February 2021:

The 90-day no fault eviction option has been removed. Landlords will no longer be able to terminate a periodic tenancy without cause by providing 90 days’ notice. Instead, a specific ground of termination must be raised (see below).

Fixed-term tenancies now automatically convert into periodic tenancies at the end of the fixed term(with some exceptions, see below).

See our summary of the new rules here for more information and the full list of changes.

So, what do these changes mean for landlords who wish to sell their rental property?

TERMINATING A TENANCY TO SELL WITH VACANT POSSESSION

All fixed-term tenancy agreements will now convert to periodic tenancies at the end of the fixed term unless:

the parties agree otherwise;

the tenant gives at least 28-days’ notice (increased from 21 days); or

the landlord gives notice in accordance with the termination grounds for periodic tenancies.

For periodic tenancies, notice periods for termination notices issued by a landlord without Tenancy Tribunal involvement will increase to either 63 or 90 days (depending on the grounds for the notice). Some of these grounds include:

63 days:

• The owner or a member of the owner’s family requires the property as their principal place of residence.

• The property is required for occupation by employees or contractors of the landlord.

90 days:

The property is to be sold.

Extensive alterations or redevelopment are to be carried out.

The premises are to be converted into commercial premises, or demolished.

SELLING A PROPERTY AS AN ONGOING RENTAL WITH EXISTING TENANTS

Landlords are required to notify tenants in writing of their intention to sell. Likewise, landlords must get tenants’ permission before entering the house to take photos or to show the property to prospective buyers.

Tenants can refuse to allow photos of their personal possessions.

While tenants cannot unreasonably refuse access, they can set reasonable conditions, such as limiting access to certain times of day or days of the week.

Tenants may refuse to allow open homes or auctions to take place at the property. They have a right to be present during viewings and may insist that the property be shown by appointment only. They can also ask for a temporary rent reduction in return for allowing open homes. Landlords do not have to grant this.

Communication and negotiation are important. Once access terms are agreed upon, they should be put in writing and signed by all parties.

Once the property is sold, the landlord must tell the tenant who the new owner is and when they will take over.

They should also provide the new owner with a copy of the tenancy agreement.

As you can see, the new Act has significant implications for both landlords and tenants, particularly when it comes to the sale of a rental property. If you are or plan on becoming a landlord or tenant in the near future, or if you are a landlord seeking to sell your rental property, we suggest seeking legal advice from a trusted professional in order to ensure your rights and obligations under the new laws are correctly observed and complied with.

If you have any questions or concerns regarding the Residential Tenancies Amendment Act 2020, please do not hesitate to get in touch with one of the team at GML Lawyers. We are committed to providing all our clients with practical, tailored advice.

The team at GML Lawyers

The post Landlord rights and duties when selling a rental property appeared first on GML Lawyers....

]]>
2190
Challenging a will on the basis of incapacity https://www.gmllawyers.co.nz/challenging-a-will-on-the-basis-of-incapacity/ Sat, 06 Mar 2021 11:00:31 +0000 https://www.gmllawyers.co.nz/?p=2189 The post Challenging a will on the basis of incapacity appeared first on GML Lawyers....

]]>

A deceased person’s Will can be challenged for several different reasons.
Claims are commonly brought under specific pieces of legislation, including:

the Family Protection Act 1995 – where a party claims that they have not been adequately provided for under a Will;

the Law Reform (Testamentary Promises) Act 1969 – where the deceased person promises to provide for a party in their Will but fails to deliver; and

the Property (Relationships) Act 1976 – where a claim is brought by the spouse or de facto partner of the deceased.

However, a Will can also be challenged on the basis that the Will-maker did not have the required ‘testamentary capacity’ at the time they made the Will.

Testamentary capacity is the specific ability to make a will, and the law is clear. It is not necessary that the Will-maker be free from any and all mental difficulties or deterioration, and it is possible that they may have testamentary capacity but lack the capacity to do other things, such as manage their business affairs. Put simply, for a Will-maker to have the required capacity, they must understand:

the nature and effects of making a Will;

the extent of the property being disposed of under the Will; and

the moral claims which they should consider in making testamentary dispositions.

Issues of testamentary capacity often arise in cases of Wills made at an advanced age, or while the Willmaker was suffering poor health. However, old age and/or physical health are not determinative of capacity.

Where there is a challenge to capacity the onus of satisfying the Court that the Will-maker had capacity rests on those seeking probate and interested parties can submit evidence in support or opposition of this finding.

Medical evidence is commonly relied upon to prove capacity, and legal practitioners will often require a Willmaker to obtain an assessment before witnessing a Will. The Court may also consider evidence from those who knew the Will-maker well at the relevant time.

If you have had a loved-one pass away and have concerns about their capacity at the time of their Will, consider seeking legal advice. Our team of lawyers at GML are committed to providing all our clients with practical, tailored advice that is timely, accurate and affordable.

The team at GML Lawyers

The post Challenging a will on the basis of incapacity appeared first on GML Lawyers....

]]>
2189
Landlords and Tenants: Residential Tenancies Amendment Act 2020 https://www.gmllawyers.co.nz/landlords-and-tenants-residential-tenancies-amendment-act-2020/ https://www.gmllawyers.co.nz/landlords-and-tenants-residential-tenancies-amendment-act-2020/#respond Mon, 21 Sep 2020 01:43:55 +0000 https://gmlnz.wpengine.com/?p=2115 The post Landlords and Tenants: Residential Tenancies Amendment Act 2020 appeared first on GML Lawyers....

]]>

The Residential Tenancies Amendment Act 2020 was passed in early August this year, bringing significant changes to tenancy law and the existing Residential Tenancies Act 1986. Whilst most changes do not come into effect until 11 February 2021, some of the amendments are already operative. As a landlord or tenant, it is crucial you familiarize yourself with these new laws as they will affect your rights and obligations in relation to your tenancy.

The major changes:

In effect from 12 August 2020 –

  • Rent increases are now limited to once every 12 months. Previously, these could be carried out every 180 days.

 In effect from 11 February 2021 –

  • The 90-day no fault eviction option has been removed. In the past, landlords could terminate a periodic tenancy without cause by providing 90 days’ notice. Now, landlords cannot evict without reason. There must be a specific ground of termination as required by law.
  • Fixed term tenancies now automatically roll into periodic tenancies at the end of the fixed term, unless the parties agree otherwise.
  • If a tenant requests to make minor alterations to the property, the landlord cannot reasonably withhold consent. Minor alterations do not extent to structural changes. They must be reversible.
  • Landlords can terminate the tenancy on the grounds of antisocial behaviour. To do so, the landlord must have issued the tenant with at least 3 written warnings within 90 days. Antisocial behaviour is defined within the Act as harassment or any other act or omission which reasonably causes alarm, distress or nuisance that is more than minor. 
  • If a landlord wants to move back into the property or use it to house family, 63 days’ notice is now required – up from the previous 42 days. It must be a “genuine need”, which requires that the new tenant move in within 90 days.
  • Landlords may terminate for non-payment of rent if payment is late by 5 working days on 3 separate occasions within 90 days, or if it is late by 21 days on any single occasion.
  • Tenants are now able to assign their tenancies. The landlord can only decline if they have a reasonable reason for doing so.
  • Rental bidding has been banned, meaning all rental properties must now be listed with a price attached.

As you can see, the new Act has significant implications for both landlords and tenants. Most of these changes will be coming into effect early next year, hence now is the time to make sure you fully understand these new laws and review your tenancies accordingly. If you are or plan on becoming a landlord or tenant in the near future, we suggest seeking legal advice from a trusted professional in order to ensure your rights and obligations under the new laws are correctly observed and complied with.

If you have any questions or concerns regarding the Residential Tenancies Amendment Act 2020, please do not hesitate to get in touch with one of the team at GML Lawyers. 

The post Landlords and Tenants: Residential Tenancies Amendment Act 2020 appeared first on GML Lawyers....

]]>
https://www.gmllawyers.co.nz/landlords-and-tenants-residential-tenancies-amendment-act-2020/feed/ 0 2115
Important Changes to Trust Law – Trusts Act 2019 https://www.gmllawyers.co.nz/important-changes-to-trust-law-trusts-act-2019/ https://www.gmllawyers.co.nz/important-changes-to-trust-law-trusts-act-2019/#respond Sun, 06 Sep 2020 21:01:54 +0000 https://gmlnz.wpengine.com/?p=1997 The post Important Changes to Trust Law – Trusts Act 2019 appeared first on GML Lawyers....

]]>

As you may be aware, the existing Trustee Act 1956 will be replaced by the Trusts Act 2019 (‘the new Act’), which comes into force on 30 January 2021.

The new Act primarily serves as a restatement and clarification of existing trust law, in a way which modernises the (very) outdated 1956 Act. Historically, the operation and management of trusts have required minimal trustee involvement. Under the new Act, that all changes. Trustees are now enlisted to play a much more “hands-on” role from early 2021 onwards and face serious consequences for failing to do so.

Overall, the Act increases compliance requirements imposed on trustees, gives beneficiaries’ greater access to information, and increases the scope for beneficiary claims against trustees and professional advisors. Trustees in particular need to ensure that they understand the key features of the Act and discuss their obligations with their legal advisors in order to avoid any potential legal ramifications down the line.

A quick overview of the key changes contained in the Act:

  1. The age of majority is now 18 (rather than the current age of 20)
  2. The maximum life of a non-charitable trust is extended to 125 years (currently 80 years)
  3. Trustees now have mandatory duties, which cannot be modified or contracted out of.
  4. Trustees also have default duties, which are optional and can be varied by the trust deed. Unless specifically dis-applied or varied, they will apply by default
  5. Exemption and indemnity clauses will only be given effect in limited circumstances. These clauses can be included, but they cannot protect a trustee from liability arising out of dishonesty, wilful misconduct or gross negligence. If it purports to do this, the clause will be struck down as invalid
  6. Trustees must keep certain documents and retain them for the duration of their trusteeship. This includes things like the trust deed (and any variations to it), financial statements, and letters or memoranda of wishes
  7. Trustees must provide all beneficiaries with basic information relating to the trust
  8. If a beneficiary requests for specific trust information, this information must be made available to them within a reasonable time. There are only limited circumstances when the trustee can refuse the request for information
  9. A trustee who wishes to retire must seek a discharge in writing from the person with the power of removal. A trustee is not discharged from liability simply from notifying the other trustees of their retirement.
  10. Beneficiaries can now apply to the court to review trustee decisions on the ground that the decisions was “not reasonably open to the trustee in the circumstances” to make. If the beneficiary can establish a “genuine and substantial dispute”, the onus shifts to the trustee to establish that their decision was reasonably open in the circumstances.

 “What does this mean for me”?

  • If you are a trustee, beneficiary or owner of a trust, you need to make sure you are familiar with the new Act before it comes into force on 31 January 2021. There are legal consequences for failing to adhere to the provisions of the new Act, therefore it is in your best interests to speak to a legal advisor as soon as possible.
  • Trusts are commonly used in asset protection and estate planning – and for good reason. Under the right circumstances, they are an excellent vehicle for managing personal assets. However, with the new Act comes greater compliance duties, which will naturally increase the time and costs involved with administering these trusts. You may wish to consider whether the reasons behind why you initially set up the trust are still valid. Are they still cost-efficient?
  • The increased duties and obligations for trustees means more work and care must be undertaken when managing trusts. Are you happy with this heightened level of risk? Do you have the time to overlook the trust? Do you want to hire a professional trustee instead?
  • Increased disclosure requirements means beneficiaries will now have greater access to information – some of this being information that you’d rather keep confidential. Are you comfortable with this information being made available to all beneficiaries? You may also wish to consider amending certain trust documents, such as trust deeds and memoranda of wishes.

These new laws will be enforced by New Zealand courts from January 2021 onwards. If you have any queries about your trust, wish to make changes to your trust, or simply want to seek further clarification on these new laws, please do not hesitate to approach one of the team at GML Lawyers and seek our advice. We have a number of highly-experienced experts in trusts, estate planning and asset protection. We want to ensure all our clients are achieving their optimum desired results with the highest levels of personal protection that can be afforded.

Shareholders’ Agreements – Always Have It In Writing!

A Shareholders’ Agreement operates as a contract between the shareholders of a company, regulating the relationship between the shareholders and governing how the company will be managed. Whilst they are not mandatory under the Companies Act 1993, more often than not you will see them being used in practice. They are akin to a ‘Relationship Property Agreement’ between parties to a relationship or a ‘Partnership Agreement’ between business partners. Because Shareholders’ Agreements are private documents, they do not need to be registered with the Companies Office, and therefore attract a higher degree of confidentiality than other documents such as the Company Constitution.

What do they do?

  • Sets out the rights and obligations of shareholders
  • Regulates the purchase and sale of shares within the company
  • Describe how the company is going to be run
  • Defines the processes for (important) decision making
  • Provide an element of protection for minority shareholders

They cover things like: 

  • Dividend policies – when and how dividends are paid out
  • Composition of the company’s board and board meeting procedures
  • Appointment, removal and remuneration of directors
  • Restrictions on share transfers and/or new share issues
  • Shareholder voting rights
  • Non-compete obligations on shareholders
  • Exit mechanisms for shareholders who want out
  • Dispute resolution provisions (which is important as resorting to battling it out in the courts is costly and time-consuming!)

The above list is not exhaustive. Essentially, there is no limit as to what can be included in a Shareholders’ Agreement. However, it is advised that you do consider having one in place, whether you are a small family-run business or a multi-national conglomerate. Such agreements increase accountability and trust between all stakeholders, whilst reducing uncertainty and ambiguity.

If you are considering starting up a company or buying into a company as a shareholder, please do not hesitate to contact us at GML Lawyers for our legal advice. Our commercial law experts can assist you with all aspects of your business, including the adoption of a Shareholders’ Agreement tailored to your needs.

Shareholder’s Access to Company Information

The term ‘shareholder’ can be used interchangeably with the word ‘owner’ in a commercial context. As a shareholder, you will want to keep an eye on how your company is doing. To do so, quite often this will require you to access company information and records. Sometimes this information is already publicly available, whilst other times you will have to specifically request it from the company. The Companies Act 1993 sets out the procedures and obligations of each party relating to this.

Section 216 provides shareholders with the power to request for company records from the company. “Company records” includes the following: 

  • Shareholders’ minutes and resolutions
  • Copies of written communications to shareholders
  • Annual reports and financial statements

Shareholders are entitled to these records under statute – the board does not have any discretion in determining whether this information should be made available to shareholders. As a shareholder, you ultimately have a vested interest in all property owned by the company, including its records. Accordingly, this is reflected by the law. Under section 216(2), a company and its directors commit an offence for failing to provide the information that is sought, and is liable for a fine up to $10,000.

In addition to company records specifically available to shareholders under section 216, section 215 gives the public the right to inspect certain records by sending a written request to the company. These publicly-available records include the certification of incorporation, the company constitution, the share register, and the full names and residential addresses of the directors. It may be useful to note that this information is readily accessible on the Companies Register website, which means you do not have to request for this information directly from the company. It is as simple as searching the Companies Register for the company name, which will bring up all the relevant information.

Shareholders can also seek further information from the company under section 178. This section provides shareholders with the right to obtain information held by the company, by making a written request specifying the information sought. The company is entitled to charge the shareholder for the provision of this information, however the amount must be reasonable. Following receipt of the written request for information, a company has 10 working days to either:

  • Provide the information; or
  • Agree to provide the information within a specified period; or
  • Agree to provide the information within a specified period at a cost; or
  • Refuse the request and specify reasons for doing so.

Section 178(4) allows the company to refuse the request in limited circumstances, such as where the disclosure of the information would likely prejudice the commercial position of the company or any other person, or where the request is frivolous or vexatious. For this reason, it is best to include in your written request the specifics of why you require the information, and what you intend to do with it. If a company refuses your request for information, you can make an application to the court for an order requiring the company to supply the information under subsection (7). The court will only grant this order after an analysis of the facts and undertaking a balancing exercise between the reasons for providing the information versus reasons for withholding the information.

As a shareholder, it is your general right to have access to certain company documents. The information contained in these documents is what allows you to make informed decisions regarding your investment, and also a way to ensure that your investment is being run in a way which suits you. The Companies Act 1993 has a number of provisions which specifies the scope of these rights and the process to obtain information.

If you have any queries regarding your right to company information as a shareholder, please get in touch with us. Our team of lawyers at GML are committed to providing all our clients with practical, tailored advice.

 

The post Important Changes to Trust Law – Trusts Act 2019 appeared first on GML Lawyers....

]]>
https://www.gmllawyers.co.nz/important-changes-to-trust-law-trusts-act-2019/feed/ 0 1997
Welcome David Rooke and Staff https://www.gmllawyers.co.nz/welcome-david-rooke-and-staff/ https://www.gmllawyers.co.nz/welcome-david-rooke-and-staff/#respond Sun, 12 Jul 2020 22:28:34 +0000 https://gmlnz.wpengine.com/?p=1878 The post Welcome David Rooke and Staff appeared first on GML Lawyers....

]]>

As of 7 July 2020 David Rooke Law office was incorporated into GML Lawyers. David and his team Deepal Kumar, Maureen Lee and Lyn Jaggard will be joining us and bringing with them more than 30 years’ experience practicing in East Auckland with a particular emphasis in family law, relationship property and civil disputes. 

As an existing David Rooke Law client, you will see the same familiar faces providing the great legal service you are accustomed to. Our existing and new clients will now have access to enhanced suite of legal services such as civil and family law court work but otherwise things will remain largely the same.

We all look forward to working with new and existing clients so do not hesitate to contact one our team who are here to help.

The post Welcome David Rooke and Staff appeared first on GML Lawyers....

]]>
https://www.gmllawyers.co.nz/welcome-david-rooke-and-staff/feed/ 0 1878
COVID-19 Employment issues: Wage Subsidy https://www.gmllawyers.co.nz/covid-19-employment-issues-wage-subsidy/ https://www.gmllawyers.co.nz/covid-19-employment-issues-wage-subsidy/#respond Wed, 17 Jun 2020 23:34:00 +0000 https://gmlnz.wpengine.com/?p=1451 The post COVID-19 Employment issues: Wage Subsidy appeared first on GML Lawyers....

]]>

The government is offering a Wage Subsidy Scheme to all businesses in an attempt to support employers who are struggling with the financial repercussions of COVID-19. It is intended to support employers to keep paying their staff over the full subsidy period of 12 weeks, and also to ensure that affected employees are still able to receive some income during this period. This subsidy expires on 9 June 2020, however the government has recently announced an Extension of the Wage Subsidy Scheme which will become available to businesses from 10 June 2020.

Who can apply?

The government’s wage subsidy scheme can be applied for by all New Zealand businesses adversely affected by COVID-19, including those who are self-employed, contractors, or sole traders. The government had previously imposed a $150,000 cap on payments per business, however this cap has since been removed and businesses can now apply on a per-person basis with no limitation. This means the subsidy can now be accessed by all businesses regardless of size.

How much can I receive?

The subsidy scheme operates on a flat rate basis:

  • Full-time employees (working 20 hours or more) receive $585.80 per week; and
  • Part-time employees (working less than 20 hours) receive $350 per week

It is up to the employer to apply for the subsidy on behalf of each of its employees. The payment will be made as a lump sum to the employer, covering a period of 12 weeks. It is then the obligation of the employer to pass on these payments to their staff accordingly.

What are the criteria?

To be eligible for the subsidy, businesses must have experienced a 30% decline in revenue (actual or projected) in any month between January and June 2020, compared to the same month in 2019 as a result of COVID-19. They must be registered and operating in New Zealand, and have taken active steps to mitigate the financial implications of COVID-19 on their business activities, such as talking to their bank or utilising any internal cash reserves readily available to them.

For those who are self-employed and experience variable monthly incomes, they need to be able to demonstrate the 30% revenue loss assessment against the previous year’s monthly average.

What are the employer’s obligations?

As an employer, you must:

  • Retain the employees which you have applied for the subsidy on behalf of for the duration of the 12-week subsidy period; and
  • Use best endeavours to pay those employees at least 80% of their usual income for the duration of the subsidised period. If that isn’t possible, you must pass on at least the full amount of the subsidy ($585.80 for full-time employees, $350 for part-time employees). However, if an employee’s ordinary wages are less than the subsidy amount (ie. a part-time employee who only works 8 hours per week), you are only required to pay them their usual weekly income.

Wage Subsidy Extension

The current 12-week Wage Subsidy Scheme expires on 9 June 2020. However, a Wage Subsidy Extension has been announced and will be available to provide ongoing support to businesses from 10 June 2020.

This scheme is intended to provide further relief to employers who are still significantly impacted by COVID-19. It covers a period of 8 weeks, and operates similarly to the original 12-week scheme. To be eligible, businesses must have suffered (or be predicted to suffer) a 50% decline in revenue over the 30-day period prior to the application date, compared to the nearest comparable period last year.

As with the original Wage Subsidy Scheme, the payment will be made as a lump sum to employers. The amount each employee is entitled to remains the same – that is: $585.80 per full-time employee per week, and $380 per part-time employee per week. Employers will need to reapply for the Extension once their current 12-week subsidy has come to an end.

Applications for the Wage Subsidy Extension scheme will open from 10 June, and can be made till the closing date on 1 September 2020.  

The post COVID-19 Employment issues: Wage Subsidy appeared first on GML Lawyers....

]]>
https://www.gmllawyers.co.nz/covid-19-employment-issues-wage-subsidy/feed/ 0 1451
COVID-19 Employment issues: Restructuring and Redundancies https://www.gmllawyers.co.nz/covid-19-employment-issues-restructuring-and-redundancies/ https://www.gmllawyers.co.nz/covid-19-employment-issues-restructuring-and-redundancies/#respond Wed, 17 Jun 2020 23:28:45 +0000 https://gmlnz.wpengine.com/?p=1437 The post COVID-19 Employment issues: Restructuring and Redundancies appeared first on GML Lawyers....

]]>

COVID-19 has taken a significant toll on businesses with its effects being felt in almost every single industry. As a result, its consequences will naturally have a flow-on effect to employers and employees. Many businesses may have to look at restructuring and reducing its number of employees in order to survive the next few months, which means employment laws must be complied with.

The legal test for establishing a legal termination of employment is to ask: would a fair and reasonable employer have done the same under the same circumstances? If so, then the employer’s actions would be justified under the Employment Relations Act 2000. As this requires a case-by-case evaluation, the circumstances of each particular case are of crucial importance. One minor factual difference between two otherwise identical disputes could result in two completely different results in terms of legality for the employer.

Broadly speaking, there are four criteria which need to be met for a dismissal to be legal:

 

  1. The redundancy must be genuine

This means the business must genuinely be in a position where its current structure needs alteration, which involves the disestablishment of some of its current positions. Reasons such as a significant downturn in sales and revenue, a loss of customers/suppliers, and/or a shift in market requirements will generally constitute a genuine reason for dismissal, provided the employer can prove this with supporting documentation and evidence.

 

  1. The employer must deal with the employee in good faith

Clear channels of communication need to be established during the consultation period. Employers must provide the relevant employee/s reasons surrounding their decision, and give them an opportunity to respond to the contents of the information before the final decision is made. The decision to dismiss cannot be pre-determined before consulting with the employee, otherwise this would constitute negotiations in bad faith.

 

  1. The employer must follow a fair and reasonable procedure

A fair and reasonable process includes:

  • Complying with the terms of the employment contract/agreement and any internal policies (NOTE: the first step is always to consult the specific wording of each individual employment agreement, as procedures and policies surrounding redundancies and restructuring may already be specified)
  • Ensuring clear lines of communication are established
  • Documenting the employer’s business case, reasons and proposals as evidence
  • Giving employees access to all relevant information
  • Providing employees with a reasonable opportunity to consider and respond to any proposals

 

  1. The employer must consider all other practical alternatives before turning to redundancy as a last resort

Employers must genuinely consider all other practical options reasonably available to them before making the decision to dismiss. This is because an employer must explain and justify its decision to the employee during the consultation process. Other options could include reduced work hours, use of annual leave or leave without pay, or reaching some other mutual agreement with the employee to vary the terms of their employment.

 In light of COVD-19, business (which have not already done so) may want to consider applying for the government wage subsidy scheme a first port of call. This support package was designed specifically to assist employers and employees following the financial disruptions of COVID-19. Employers are encouraged to make use of this package in order to keep their current staff employed. If an employer has made the decision to dismiss an employee/s before applying for the wage subsidy, then it is unlikely that a Court will find that the employer has considered all other practical options reasonably available to it prior to suggesting redundancy. For more information on the wage subsidy, please see our article titled ‘COVD-19 Employment issues: Wage subsidy’.

In a stressful and turbulent time for all, empathy and transparency goes a long way. However, if your business is forced to make someone redundant, as an employer you must ensure that the decision is substantively justified and procedurally fair. As with all employment matters, not getting the process right can be costly and draining for you and your business. If you would like some guidance throughout the entire process, whether you are an employer or employee, we are happy to assist.

The post COVID-19 Employment issues: Restructuring and Redundancies appeared first on GML Lawyers....

]]>
https://www.gmllawyers.co.nz/covid-19-employment-issues-restructuring-and-redundancies/feed/ 0 1437