Understanding Cross-Leases
5 May 2025

Understanding Cross-Leases

Introduction

 

Cross-lease properties were created as an innovative workaround to avoid strict subdivisions laws of the past. While once a practical solution, as land development and subdivision opportunities have progressed this form of ownership has led to complications not contemplated at that time for property owners; particularly when, it comes to modifications, consent requirements, and shared responsibilities.

 

Prevalent in Auckland, cross-lease properties can be complex and restrictive, often leading to disputes between co-owners. Given the legal intricacies involved, it is essential to seek legal advice before purchasing or making changes to a cross-lease property to avoid unexpected complications.


Key Features of a Cross-Lease


  • A cross-lease property will usually have two or more dwellings (flats) situated on one piece of freehold land. Accordingly, ownership of a cross-lease title grants both a freehold interest in the underlying land which a flat is built on and a leasehold interest in the flat. 


  • The cross-lease title holders collectively become the lessor and lease each of the flats to the title holder as individual lessees. The details of this arrangement are recorded in a lease instrument (cross-lease) registered on each of the cross-lease titles. 


  • The cross-lease will contain rules, rights, and obligations affecting both the lessor and lessee. Amongst the terms of the cross-lease, there will often be a requirement for the lessee to seek the consent of the lessor prior to any additions, alterations, or renovations to their flat. 


  • The cross-lease can also record the grant of an exclusive right of enjoyment over certain areas of the freehold land to a lessee (to the exclusion of the other lessee’s) and set aside areas, typically driveways, as common use areas subject to joint maintenance. 


Accordingly, careful review and understanding of how the property’s cross-lease operates is critical if you are thinking of purchasing a cross-lease property or commencing any alteration or renovation works to your cross-lease property.

 

The Court of Appeal’s decision in Turner v Goldsbury last year serves as a reminder of the importance in the need to understand the fundamental features of a cross-lease title and, by extension, the rights and obligations acquired with this form of land ownership.


The Facts of Turner v Goldsbury

 

The Turners are the owners of a coastal cross-lease property. The property was in a state of disrepair, exacerbated by flooding caused by the 2018 storm surges. Accordingly, the Turners sought to demolish and replace their existing flat to mitigate the property's coastal inundation risk.


They relied on a provision in their cross-lease that allowed for structural alterations to their flat, provided each flat owner’s consent was obtained, with consent not to be unreasonably withheld. This is a common condition in most cross-leases. The Turners managed to obtain the consent of the majority of the other flat owners but failed to secure the consent of the Goldsburys. This, ultimately, led to over half a decade of arbitration and ongoing litigation.


The court decision highlights that there is no concrete answer as to what will be considered acting “unreasonably” or whether a clause granting a right to “alter” a flat inherently grants a right to demolish and build a replacement flat. What is certain is that each case will be determined on a case-by-case basis and will require an analysis of the facts.


Furthermore, despite substantial evidence showing that the Goldsbury’s were deliberately being difficult and unneighbourly, the court found that their decision to withhold consent was not considered unreasonable as there were legitimate concerns and legal considerations behind their decision. A key consideration was the fact that there were substantial differences between the existing flat and the proposed new structure.

 

Lessons to Take

 

This decision reiterates the importance of obtaining legal advice to understand the rules, obligations, and limits of a cross-lease. These matters can be addressed early on by completing thorough due diligence before acquiring a cross-lease property. If you are thinking of purchasing a cross-lease property, it is vital to consider your future intentions for the property and whether the cross-lease will hinder these plans. A detailed review of the cross-lease and title by an experienced lawyer is essential to ensure alignment with your objectives.


The decision also underscores that any ambiguity in the lease can be leveraged as a roadblock to development. An often-overlooked aspect is that a key attraction of cross-lease properties is their ability to maintain the integrity of an existing development, preventing immediate neighbours from undertaking substantial high-density redevelopments.



If you are considering acquiring or selling a cross-lease property, planning to make renovations to your cross-lease property, or looking to convert your cross-lease title to a freehold title, our team is ready to assist you.

31 August 2026
We're pleased to introduce Zak Nasir , Senior Associate in our Land Development and Commercial Property team. Zak brings a unique blend of legal and planning expertise, helping clients navigate some of New Zealand's most complex property and development projects. With extensive experience in land development, subdivisions, commercial property and resource management matters, Zak advises developers, private clients and infrastructure providers on all aspects of property acquisition, development structuring, subdivision, leasing and disposal. His practice spans projects of all sizes, from boutique developments through to major residential subdivisions involving hundreds of lots. Before becoming a lawyer, Zak worked as a town planner, giving him a valuable understanding of the planning and development process. This background allows him to identify potential issues early and provide commercially focused, practical advice throughout the life of a project. Clients and colleagues alike value his ability to bridge legal, planning and development considerations to achieve successful outcomes. He has previously worked in London as a lawyer and most recently at a large top tier firm in Auckland. Throughout his career, Zak has advised on significant commercial property transactions, large-scale development projects, leasing arrangements and Public Works Act matters. He is known for his pragmatic approach and his ability to work collaboratively with surveyors, engineers, planners and government agencies to resolve complex issues efficiently. Whether assisting first-time developers or experienced industry participants, Zak is committed to delivering clear, practical solutions that help clients move forward with confidence. We are delighted to have him as part of the Glaister Keegan team and look forward to the continued value he brings to our clients and colleagues. Contact: zak.nasir@glaister.co.nz
31 August 2026
Alternative Holidays Current system If the full-time employee works on a public holiday that is an OWD, they get one full alternative holiday , no matter how many hours they worked. The full-time employee must take their leave on another OWD. The full-time employee can cash their leave up after 12 months. Proposed new system The full-time employee earns alternative holiday hours , matching the number of hours they worked (or were on call and called in) on the public holiday. The full-time employee can take the hours on any day they could normally work . The full-time employee can cash their hours up at any time . Leave Payments Current system Leave payments require multiple calculations to account for variable hours and payments. Annual leave taken soon after parental or volunteer leave is paid at a lower rate . Proposed new system All leave is paid at an hourly rate , based on the lowest hourly rate payable for the day the leave is taken plus an average for piece‑rate work. Fixed allowances are paid in full during leave. Annual leave after parental or volunteer leave is paid normally . Leave Compensation Payments (Replacing “Pay as You Go”) Current system Employers and workers can agree to “Pay as You Go” (8% of gross earnings) for casual short‑term work. Proposed new system A Leave Compensation Payment (LCP) of 12.5% of a worker’s ordinary hourly rate is paid on all casual hours . Workers with standard hours also get LCP on additional hours they work, instead of accruing annual or sick leave on those hours. Fixed‑term workers earn leave from day one .
31 August 2026
Artificial intelligence ( AI ) is no longer a futuristic idea knocking at the door of legal practice. It is already here. For lawyers, the challenge is not simply to use AI, but to use it responsibly, carefully, and in a way that genuinely benefits clients. In broad terms, AI can process, organise, and generate information at speed. In legal practice, that can be valuable. AI can assist with first drafts of correspondence, summarising lengthy emails or documents, preparing chronologies, comparing versions of agreements, identifying recurring clauses, and improving the clarity of client updates. For example, a lawyer reviewing a large chain of correspondence may use AI to prepare an initial summary of key dates and issues. A commercial lawyer may use it to highlight changes between document versions. A litigator may use it to organise background material before preparing advice. Used properly, AI can reduce time spent on repetitive tasks and allow lawyers to focus on judgment, strategy, and client service. However, AI is not a lawyer in disguise. It can produce inaccurate material, miss context, reflect bias, orgenerate confident-sounding answers that are wrong. In legal practice, there are also serious risks around privacy, confidentiality, professional responsibility, and over-reliance. AI may assist with the heavy lifting, but lawyers must still hold the pen. At Glaister Keegan Lawyers, our AI journey is guided by a balance of innovation and discipline. The firm has developed an artificial intelligence policy to guide the responsible, ethical, and practical use of AI. The policy includes strict requirements relating to privacy, confidentiality, competence, professional responsibility, and verification. Client confidentiality remains fundamental. The firm will take a careful and measured approach to the use of AI tools. Any AI tool used by the firm must provide appropriate safeguards for privacy, confidentiality and information security. This means adopting tools and processes that support the secure handling of client information, controlled access, and responsible use, while maintaining the standards of care, confidentiality, and professionalism our clients expect. Our staff are receiving appropriate guidance and training on the responsible use of AI tools, including their limitations and the circumstances in which they may be used. All AI-generated output will be checked by our staff before being used or relied upon. In short, we are embracing AI, but with the guardrails firmly in place. For us, AI is not about replacing people with prompts. It is about equipping our lawyers to work more efficiently, think more clearly, and continue delivering practical, trusted legal advice in a changing world.  About the Author - Adrian Sharma is a qualified Fiji lawyer and our AML Compliance Officer. As he works towards requalifying in New Zealand, he continues to contribute his strong legal and compliance knowledge, with a keen interest in how emerging technologies such as AI are shaping the future of business and professional services.
Show More