Glaister Keegan had its biennial firm photo this month, it was great to get the team together for this shot to celebrate the people behind the work!
A recent High Court decision has clarified whether owners can rent out their homes via Airbnb in subdivisions that restrict “commercial activity”. The outcome may surprise some. In Cameron Drive Management Company Ltd v Jo-Ann Real Estate Ltd [2025] NZHC 721 , a homeowner occasionally rented their holiday home on Airbnb. Other owners in the 14-lot subdivision believed this breached a land covenant, which stated no commercial activity could be carried out on or from a property except for “private homestays”. This exception applied so long as the homestays didn’t affect the neighbourhood’s character or others’ privacy. The Court was asked to decide whether short-term Airbnb rentals, where the owner is not present, counted as prohibited commercial activity. Interestingly, the Court found that, while Airbnb hosting is in fact a commercial activity, it did not breach this particular covenant. The key reason being that the business side of the transaction happened online; that is, off-site. The booking and payment were made via the Airbnb platform, not on the property itself. Once guests arrived, they simply stayed at the house like any other occupant. In contrast, a “private homestay” (which the covenant allowed) typically involves the owner being present and actively hosting. The Court explained that “private homestays” were known in 1999 (when the covenant was drafted) as situations where the owner stays in the house with guests. Airbnb-style renting, where the owner is absent, didn’t fit that model. But because the owner wasn’t actively running a business from the property during the rental period, there was no breach. This decision serves as a reminder that land covenants must be interpreted in light of their wording, intent, and context at the time they were created. If you're buying in a subdivision with covenants, it’s important to seek legal advice early on so you understand exactly what they mean and how they could limit what you can do with the property.
Trees offer a wide range of benefits. They improve air quality, offer cooling and shade, reduce soil erosion, beautify the land, and can increase the value of your property. Unfortunately, not everyone sees trees the same way.What is a peaceful garden feature to one neighbour, can be a nuisance (or even a threat) to another. Overhanging branches, invading roots, blocked sunlight, or leaf-clogged gutters can all spark tension, and lead to potentially bitter and costly legal disputes between otherwise friendly neighbours. At Glaister Keegan, we have seen first-hand when something as natural as a tree can become the “root” of a bitter, costly legal dispute. Here's what you need to know before taking action, and how we can assist you in protecting your rights. Your Rights as a Property Owner Every property owner has the right to enjoy and use their land, and that includes planting trees. But that right has limits. When a tree on your neighbour’s property starts affecting your land, the law steps in. Common problems include: overhanging branches crossing the boundary line roots damaging driveways, foundations, or pipes trees blocking access to sunlight or scenic views; and fallen leaves or branches clogging gutters and drains. Can You Just Cut It Back? Yes—But Carefully You are generally allowed to trim back any branches or roots that cross onto your property, but only up to the boundary line. This is known as “abatement.” However, there are a few important rules: you must not trespass onto your neighbour’s land you must not cause unnecessary harm to the tree or surrounding property; and because the cuttings still belong to your neighbour, you may be required to return the cuttings. Importantly, some trees are protected by local council regulations, resource consent conditions, or covenants on the title. Cutting or damaging a protected tree without permission could result in significant penalties. We strongly recommend getting legal advice before doing any trimming (even if the branches are clearly on your side). When Trees Cause Damage or Safety Hazards If a tree is damaging your property, you may be able to: remove the offending roots or branches (within legal limits); and recover the cost of repairs and removal through the Disputes Tribunal (for claims under $30,000) or District Court (for larger claims). If the tree poses a safety risk, or unreasonably interferes with your view, sunlight, or enjoyment of your land, you can apply to the Court for an order under the Property Law Act 2007. The Court can order your neighbour to trim or remove the tree if it is deemed fair and reasonable to do so. The Court will consider: what the risk to people, property, or health is whether your view or sunlight is being unduly obstructed whether the tree is interfering with crops, drains, or everyday enjoyment of your land what the tree’s public, historical, or cultural value is; and whether the tree existed before you bought your property. To succeed, you will need to show you will suffer more hardship if the tree stays than your neighbour would if it were removed. Timing and Costs If the Court orders the tree to be trimmed or removed, your neighbour usually has 20 working days to comply. While the Court can order them to contribute to the cost, the expense usually falls to the person making the application. Need Legal Advice? We are Here to Help If a tree is causing conflict between you and your neighbour or you are unsure of your legal position, talk to us first. We can guide you through your options, help you protect your rights, and, where needed, represent you in the Disputes Tribunal or Court. Contact our litigation team for practical, reliable advice before a small dispute takes root and grows into something much bigger. Paul Kim, Alex Wang, Brett Vautier
Few things can sour a neighbourly relationship like a dispute over a fence. What begins as a simple question of who pays, who builds, and where exactly does the boundary lie, can quickly escalate into a frustrating, and often expensive, legal conflict. Generally, an owner is not required to fence off his or her land from the adjoining land of a neighbour. If intending to do so, however, consent of the neighbour or a court order is a prerequisite. At first glance, fences may seem straightforward. Most are built with mutual agreement and shared cost because both neighbours benefit from a well-constructed, properly placed fence. But when opinions differ or communication breaks down, disagreements can arise —sometimes over the smallest details. Common Fence Disputes Between Neighbours Fence disputes typically occur when: one neighbour erects, repairs, or replaces a fence without the other’s consent there is disagreement about who should pay; and the fence does not align with the actual legal boundary. What the Law Says Under New Zealand’s Fencing Act 1978, neighbours share equal responsibility for the cost of building or maintaining a boundary fence, provided the proper legal process is followed. Here’s how it works: Fencing Notice : To start the process, you must issue a fencing notice to your neighbour. This formal document outlines: where the fence will be built the type of work and materials proposed the estimated costs and how they will be shared; and what happens if the neighbour does not respond. Objections and Time Limits : Your neighbour has 21 days to issue a cross-notice if they disagree with any aspect of your proposal. Legal Requirements : Strict compliance with the required process is important. That means, a flawed fencing notice means your neighbour is not legally obliged to contribute. Conversely, if your neighbour doesn’t respond in time, the proposed work is considered agreed upon. Unresolved Disputes : If agreement cannot be reached, you can apply to the Disputes Tribunal or District Court to determine: where the fence should go what kind of fence is appropriate who pays for what; and who carries out the work. Unapproved Fences : If you build or alter a fence without consent or if your fence crosses into your neighbour’s land, they can apply to the Tribu n al or Court to have it removed or altered; even if, you were not seeking financial contribution. What should you do if a dispute arises? Should you have a disagreement with your neighbour concerning a fence, we recommend you discuss the problem with your neighbour in the first instance and attempt to reach agreement directly. Often, misunderstandings can be resolved through clear and respectful communication. However, where a neighbourly relationship has broken down and the parties cannot agree, resort to the courts may be the only way forward. Whether you are planning to build a new fence, facing an unexpected fencing notice, or already caught in a dispute with your neighbour, we can help you understand your rights and options. Contact our litigation team for clear, practical legal advice tailored to your situation. We are here to protect your interests and help you resolve the issue, quickly and cost-effectively.
1 July 2025 We are delighted to announce the promotion of four high-performing staff to Associate; Jessica Perrett, Hope Horrocks and William van Roosmalen, and Danielle Moore to Associate - Registered Conveyancing Practitioner. All four are highly experienced legal practitioners who provide thoughtful, tailored advice and outstanding client service. The appointment is effective from 1 July 2025. Jessica Perrett Jessica is a solicitor in our Trusts, Estate Planning and Asset Protection team. With over 15 years of legal experience, as firstly a legal executive, then as a solicitor, she has an invaluable understanding of client needs. She delivers excellent outcomes for her clients and has a proactive and efficient approach. Hope Horrocks Hope is a solicitor in our Commercial Property team. She has several years of commercial experience prior to working in the law. She prides herself on undertaking the highest-quality work for her clients in a supportive, efficient and commercially minded-manner. William van Roosmalen William is an experienced litigator with a proven track record in resolving disputes of all shapes and sizes. He has worked in criminal prosecution, specialised in insolvency litigation, and more recently worked with a broad range of civil and commercial litigation. Clients appreciate William’s advocacy, highly responsive, relatable, and pragmatic approach. Danielle Moore Danielle is a Registered Conveyancing Practitioner in our Property team. She has extensive experience with residential conveyancing and a passion for property law. Her clients value her highly responsive, friendly and professional manner.
Planning for the future means ensuring your assets are protected and your wishes are clearly set out. At Glaister Keegan, we provide tailored Trusts, Estate Planning & Asset Protection solutions to help you safeguard what matters most. Comprehensive and Personalised Estate Planning Protecting yourself and your assets from unforeseen events is an important consideration for many New Zealanders. At Glaister Keegan, we offer comprehensive estate planning services, including wills and enduring powers of attorney. As asset values increase and creditors become more aggressive, trust structures can also play a crucial role in asset protection. Tailored Solutions for Peace of Mind Our clients benefit from our extensive experience and the time we take to understand their circumstances and future goals. This personalised approach allows us to provide solutions that align with each client’s specific needs. Our in-depth knowledge of trusts and estates ensures your affairs are managed effectively, giving you confidence in the future. Flexible, Strategic Advice There is no one-size-fits-all approach to estate planning. We take the time to sit down with you, clarify your objectives, and develop the right structure to meet your needs. Our approach is strategic, adaptable, and designed to provide the best outcome for you and your family. Seamless, Comprehensive Support Estate planning often intersects with property and business matters. Glaister Keegan’s team works across these areas to provide seamless, well-rounded advice. We are large enough to offer a full range of services yet small enough to ensure a personalised experience. The beginning of the year is a great time to review your estate planning documents and ensure they reflect your current wishes and circumstances. If you haven’t updated your will, enduring powers of attorney, or trust structure recently, now is the perfect time to do so. If you need guidance or assistance, our team is here to help you navigate the next steps and ensure your plans are in place for the future.
When a business is sold, employers must balance their legal duty to employees with the practical realities of making a sale. The Employment Relations Act 2000 (ERA) requires employers to keep employees informed about any changes that could impact their jobs and to give them an opportunity to share their thoughts and provide feedback before decisions are finalised. However, this requirement can be challenging when a business sale is involved. Why This Matters Selling a business is a complex process and almost always affects employees, because their jobs with the current employer typically end when the sale is completed. The law requires employers to discuss these potential changes with employees before making final decisions. However, sharing sale details too early can be risky for business owners, because it involves sensitive commercial information. Common Approaches After-Sale Consultation: Many businesses wait until a sale agreement is signed before discussing the impact with employees. This allows employers to protect confidential business details but does not fully meet the legal requirement for early consultation. Conditional Sale Agreements: Some businesses use conditional sale agreements, meaning the sale only goes through once certain conditions are met. This allows time to consult employees before the sale is finalised; although, it may not fully satisfy the ERA’s requirements. Protecting Confidential Information Employers are allowed to withhold certain confidential details from employees if sharing them would harm the business. However, they must have a valid reason for keeping information private. Confidential information, in this case, refers to details shared under an expectation of secrecy. Finding the Right Balance Balancing transparency with business interests is challenging. While employers must act in good faith by informing and consulting employees, they also need to protect the business. Exploring different approaches, such as conditional sale agreements, can help businesses navigate this tricky situation while staying as compliant as possible with employment laws. Recent Case Law The above issues have been addressed by the Employment Court in 2024 in Birthing Centre Limited v Matas . The Court of Appeal subsequently declined the appeal against the findings brought by the Birthing Centre Limited. The case involved the acquisition of a private birthing centre by the MidCentral District Health Board (“MDHB”). The transaction resulted in the vendor closing its centre, terminating the employment of all midwives, with the MDHB offering them new employment. The MDHB requested that the employees not be informed of the negotiations due to confidentiality reasons and the terms of the agreement were only announced after the transaction was finalised. Although the affected employees were consulted about some terms and conditions of employment with MDHB, the termination and transfer of their employment was effectively concluded by the time they were notified. Several employees raised personal grievances for unjustified dismissal and breaches of good faith alleging they were not adequately consulted. The key focus of the arguments before the Employment Court were whether the threshold had been met allowing the vendor to withhold details of the sale until completion on the grounds that it was commercially sensitive. The Employment Court held that the vendor had failed to meet its obligations and concluded “a fair and reasonable employer could in the circumstances have considered options for exploring whether it could maintain the integrity of [its] commercial position as well as the DHB’s commercial position, while informing its employees of the proposal in a confidential way”. The Employment Court further held that the vendor had failed to: consider whether providing information to the union was viable on an embargoed basis; direct employees not to share information during the consultation process; include as a condition of sale that staff be consulted on a confidential basis and their view sought before the sale agreement became unconditional. Conclusion It is necessary to take into account basic employee rights when selling a business. Although it may be important to protect commercially sensitive information, employers need to look at ways to ensure that employees are kept informed about potential decisions which will affect their employment. A business will need objective evidence to justify maintaining confidentiality of information, including evidence of unreasonable prejudice to their commercial position which would occur if they did share information with employees prior to finalising a sale. If you have any questions or seek advice or assistance, please do not hesitate to contact Brett Vautier or Stephanie Harris.
Understanding Cross-Leases
At Glaister Keegan, protecting your financial security is a top priority. While we use a secure email server, unauthorized access to personal email accounts can still pose a risk. That’s why we have measures in place to safeguard your transactions. How We Protect Your Payments First-Time Payments to You – When we make a payment to you for the first time, we’ll always call you using the phone number we have on file. This ensures we verbally confirm both your account name and number before processing any transfer. When You’re Paying Us – To verify our payment details, we strongly encourage you to call us directly on our publicly listed number before making a payment, to confirm our account name and number, especially for first-time transactions. Bank Security Enhancements New Zealand trading banks have introduced a ‘confirmation of payee’ system. This means when you enter our account details, the bank will let you know if the account name matches the account number. If they don’t match, do not proceed with the payment. What’s Next? To enhance security further, we are in the process of becoming a registered payee with major trading banks. This will provide extra reassurance that you’re sending payments to the right place. Your security matters to us, and we’re committed to keeping your payments safe. If you ever have any concerns, don’t hesitate to reach out.
Learn why obtaining a LIM (Land Information Memorandum) is crucial when buying property in New Zealand. Discover key information a LIM includes, its role in due diligence, and why you should get your own report.
Learn how landlords can address tenant rent defaults under New Zealand's Property Law Act 2007. Explore PLA Notices, lease cancellation, and obligations to mitigate losses while avoiding legal pitfalls.
Struggling with unpaid invoices? Learn about debt recovery options, from letters of demand to statutory demands and court proceedings. Protect your business's cash flow with expert guidance.
Navigate separation with expert legal advice on property division, child arrangements, financial support, and protection orders. Discover tailored solutions to ensure the best outcome for you and your family.
Learn how the Construction Contracts (Retention Money) Amendment Act 2023 protects subcontractors in New Zealand. Understand new trust requirements, reporting obligations, and penalties for non-compliance.
Explore Collaborative Practice, a non-adversarial approach to resolving family law issues in New Zealand. Learn how it fosters cooperation, reduces costs, and supports tailored, respectful solutions for families.
Learn about private nuisance law in New Zealand, including examples, legal elements, and remedies. Discover how to address issues like noise, odours, and encroachment that interfere with property enjoyment.
Explore the Supreme Court’s Mainzeal decision on insolvent trading, its impact on directors’ duties under the Companies Act, and the need for Companies Act reform. Learn how this ruling reshapes expectations for directors managing near-insolvency.
Explore the pros and cons of purchasing leasehold properties in New Zealand. Learn about ground rent, lease terms, rent reviews, and how leasehold compares to freehold. Get expert advice to make an informed decision.
New Zealand’s most commonly used standard form construction contract has undergone a long-awaited review and update in what is now the NZS 3910:2023 form
The Property (Relationships) 1976 (“Act”) sets out the rules for the division and distribution of a couple’s property (whether they are a de facto couple, in a civil union, or married) on their separation or on the death of either of them.