Insights & Articles

This article explores a legal case heard by the New Zealand Court of Appeal, specifically regarding a dispute involving the supply of a building cladding product. The case involved two building owners who initiated legal proceedings against the German-based manufacturer and New Zealand-based distributors. The building owners alleged that the product was faulty and posed risks to their buildings, leading to potential loss and expense.

In an age where time is of the essence and personal schedules are tightly packed, the reliability of transportation services is paramount. Late departures by trains, buses, flights, and other means of transportation have become a common concern for consumers around the world. The rights of consumers when faced with tardy departures are not to be taken lightly.

The Fair Trading Amendment Act 2021 ("Amendment Act") has made recent amendments of the Fair Trading Act 1986 with some terms being extended to small business contracts that will come into force on 16 August 2022.

The Fair Trading Amendment Act 2021 - The Fair Trading Amendment Act 2021 ("Amendment Act") was enacted on 16 August 2021. It introduces changes to the Fair Trading Act 1986 ("Act"), some of which have come into effect and others which will come into effect on 16 August 2022.

Intellectual Property is an asset that has the potential to be more valuable to your business than tangible business assets and should be protected as much as possible. A famous trade mark or a market leading patent may be of far greater value to a company than its physical assets.

The Privacy Act 2020 ("new Act") came into force in 2020, replacing the Privacy Act 1993. The purpose of the new Act was to overhaul New Zealand's existing privacy of personal information regulatory framework and bring it into line with internationally recognised privacy obligations and standards. Section 22 of the new Act sets out 13 information privacy principles ("Privacy Principles"). In this article, we focus on new developments in relation to Privacy Principle 1 ("PP1"), which addresses the purpose of collection of personal information.

On 1 October 2021, the long anticipated Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance (Lender Inquiries into Suitability and Affordability) Amendment Regulations 2020 ("Regulations") came into effect after being passed into law by the Government in November last year. The changes are well-intentioned, with the purpose being to tackle high-cost consumer loans and minimise borrower hardship that had been well documented in recent Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment inquiries into mobile trading. However, like all regulation, there is a trade-off, and these highly prescribed regulations place a significant compliance burden on responsible lenders, particularly small and medium enterprises.

On 30 October 2020 the Supreme Court delivered a landmark judgment in the context of contracts of guarantee in the case of Brougham v Regan [2020] NZSC 118. A summary of the key facts of the matter and important points in the Court's decision follow.

The High Court has found that the Government's announcement of an Alert Level 4 'Lockdown' for four weeks from 26 March 2020 in response to the Covid-19 pandemic was unlawful and potentially unenforceable for the first nine days (Borrowdale v Director-General of Health [2020] NZHC 2090). The Court also reviewed the closure of all non-essential businesses, which is significant for business owners hoping to file civil liability claims for lost revenue during this period.

There is an important update on the health and safety requirements in the construction sector we wish to share with you if you have not yet been updated. Over the last few weeks, the situation with Covid-19 in New Zealand has noticeably improved. However, it is too soon to celebrate, and there is no room for complacency as we will still be under Covid-19 Alert Level 2, starting this Thursday 14 May 2020. It will remain critical, perhaps more than ever, for everyone in the construction industry to take all necessary steps to keep the virus under control until we are down to Alert Level 1.

Section 55 of the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act 2003 ("CCCFA") provides that a person who is unable reasonably, because of illness, injury loss of employment, the end of a relationship, or other reasonable cause, to meet their obligations under a consumer credit contract and who reasonably expects to be able to discharge their obligations if the terms of the contract were changed as provided for under the CCCFA may apply to a creditor to agree to that change. In the present Covid-19 lockdown, we expect these provisions to be tested and both debtors and creditors need to know their rights and responsibilities in these sorts of situations.

A recent decision in the High Court of New Zealand has provided the first instance of the Courts using the Fair Trading Act 1986 ("FTA") to declare specific terms in a standard form consumer contract unfair, and therefore unenforceable. The decision in Commerce Commission v Home Direct Limited1 was made pursuant to sections in the FTA which were introduced in 2013 and give the Commerce Commission power to apply to the District Court or High Court for a declaration that a term in a standard form consumer contract is unfair.

The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) has released a discussion document late last year, inviting public consultation on an important subject affecting a large sector of New Zealand's working public: self-employed 'independent contractors', and companies and people who engage the services of such independent contractors, not just in the course of business, but even in some cases individual consumers utilising those services, for example ordinary member of the public using a 'ride sharing' platform. The deadline for members of the public to provide their feedback to MBIE expires at 5.00 pm on 14 February 2020.

In Mainzeal1 the former directors were held liable for a breach of section 135 of the Act. Richard Yan, (who was the founder and main shareholder of Mainzeal's parent company, Richina Pacific) was ordered to pay compensation of $36M. Each of the other directors (Shipley, Tilby and Gomm) were held liable to contribute $6M each towards that $36M.

Recent decisions of the District Court highlight the need for businesses to adhere to the Fair Trading Act 1986 ("FTA") and not mislead their customers, particularly if their customers are 'consumers' under the Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 ("CGA"). Both decisions involved prosecutions by the Commerce Commission against high profile retailers and resulted in substantial fines being awarded against these retailers.

In accordance with Section 131 of the Companies Act 1993 ("Act"), directors have a duty to act in good faith and in what they genuinely believe to be the best interests of the company. While it may be expected that directors should always behave in such a manner, and not place their personal interests ahead of the company's, various judgments have explored the extent of this duty and provided more information about the considerations director should take account of when exercising their powers.

Often in commercial contracts, parties agree that they will use their "best endeavours", their "reasonable endeavours" or their "all reasonable endeavours" to perform certain actions or to achieve a certain outcome. But what do these terms mean in reality? While there are no set definitions and much is dependent on the particular circumstances, we are able to make some practical comments about the requirements of each of these terms so you have a clear idea of what you are agreeing to.

In New Zealand, there are few prohibitions on who can become a director of a company, and no real qualification requirements. This means that some people become directors without actually understanding what their role requires. This can result in a company not being managed and governed as required by the Companies Act 1993 ("Act"), which in turn can lead to a breach of duty, which can have very serious consequences, up to and including personal liability for company debts or even criminal sanctions in the worst of cases.

Non-Executive or Passive Directors and Directors' Duties: The Courts Take no Excuses for a "Hands Off" Approach

Companies that provide goods or services on standard terms (including credit terms) should be regularly having a legal health check of their terms and their practices for ensuring the terms they are using accurately reflect their business practices, meet all of their requirements and cover off their key risks – as well as ensuring they are appropriately brought to the attention of customers or clients so that they are valid, enforceable or binding.