Online CPD Module l Booklet l PowerPoint Presentation
Package Fee (incl GST)
- $205 - NZLS members and Associate members
- $255 - Non-members
Note: Access to the online files is via your "My CPD" page. If you would like to purchase multiple packages, please contact us here.
Online CPD Module
Presentation time: 120 minutes
Agreements under s 21 of the Property (Relationships) Act 1976 are commonplace. They require a far greater degree of input, knowledge and “crystal ball gazing” on the part of practitioners who want to ensure that the agreement withstands the test of time.
This seminar is intended not only to update practitioners on recent case law but to consider and address the “grey areas” we all encounter when drafting living agreements (s 21) and settlement agreements.
This seminar considers and reflects on the interface between the provisions of the Property (Relationships) Act 1976 and the growing trend in equitable remedies. The presenters will consider the recent case law on these issues with a focus on how this may effect the drafting of agreements under ss 21 and 21A.
The presenters will also consider:
- vulnerability to challenge
- formalities in a contracting out agreement
- young couples seeking to contract out – what to “ring fence”
- how to address interests in trusts
- the impact of s 15 and contracting out – what effect will this have given the test of time
- issues as to jurisdiction
- enforcing agreements
- licence to occupy
- A must for all family and property lawyers.
After completing this module you will be:
- Informed on the general and less agreeable issues to consider when drafting s 21 agreements and settlement agreements under s 21A.
- Updated on the recent case law including decisions with respect to equitable remedies and how to address those in a contracting out context.
- Able to apply this knowledge when advising clients.
Please contact us if you use a dial up internet connection.
Authors: Amanda Donovan, Jennie Hawker
Published: 5 June 2015
Family Court Judge Burns noted in a paper in 20021 that when he was at law school he was told that the definition of a marriage was “a union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others, for life”.
He went on to suggest that a more appropriate definition of marriage today is a “union of two persons, possibly of opposite gender, usually to the exclusion of all others but not always, for as long as it lasts”.
Times have changed and more and more people wish to enter into marriage agreements contracting out of all or some of the equal sharing provisions of the Property (Relationships) Act 1976 (the Act). Socio-economic changes mean that more people will marry for a second time, women are returning to the workforce after having children, women are in higher paid jobs and the extension of the Act now includes de facto couples. There is no longer a traditional norm. A “one size fits all” regime is not appropriate. As such, the contracting out provisions of the Act have become more relevant for more people.
1 Auckland District Law Society – CLE Contracting-Out Agreements and The Property (Relationships) Act Burns, McCarthy, Pendleton, 8 October 2002.
These are the slides included in the presentation.
Number of Slides: 42