Our Expertise

We frequently act for clients in relationship property cases.        Our work includes –

• Pre-nuptial/contracting out agreement (S 21 Agreement),
• Post-separation/ relationship property division agreement (S 21A Agreement),
• Relationship property proceedings, and
• Proceedings for dissolution of nuptial settlement (S 182 orders).

 S 21 agreements are usually used by couples who wish to make arrangements regarding their properties for the future, before entering into marriage or de facto partnership, and before their properties have attracted the effects of Property (Relationships) Act 1976. Such agreements would allow the parties to arrange their respective financial affairs with clear mutual understanding of who will be entitled to what and allow the parties to keep their respective properties separate from relationship properties.

On the other hand, S 21A agreements are often entered into by people who are no longer a couple; it is the cost-effective and the only legally binding way to divide relationship property without going to Court. Appropriate assessment of the couple’s properties and accurate advice as to the correctness of the couple’s entitlement under the PRA are very important in ensuring the s 21A agreement will hold up against any challenge to set it aside.

Where couples do not agree on how their assets should be divided after breaking up, they will have to ask the Court to decide. We frequently act for clients in relationship property proceedings in the Family Court and appeals. Some recent examples of our representation include:

• Y v A 2022. We acted for the applicant husband who simply sought equal division. The respondent wife occupied the property for six years following separate and did not share rental income with the husband. She also presented loan documents purports to show that her mother is a creditor to the relationship properties. We successfully showed the Court that these loan agreements were not genuine using the testimony of expert forensic witness and that she lied on a number of material issues. The loan documents were not accepted, the husband received equal division and occupation rent for the duration of the separation.

• Ngae v Koh [2019] NZHC 2466. A successful appeal of a Family Court judgment on the issue of the parents’ entitlement to a couple’s relationship property. The parents of one de facto partner provided the deposit to the couple to purchase a property, which the parents had intended to be used as the home for the wider family. The Family Court’s judgment did not recognise the parents’ interests, instead, treated it as that de facto partner’s financial contribution. On appeal, the High Court agreed with us that the parents had an equitable interest in the family home. The interest, for reason of not being in writing, could not be one under a expressed trust and cover the entirety of the property. Instead, it was deemed as a resulting trust interest proportional to the parents’ deposit contribution. We also succeeded in adducing further, non-fresh, evidence on appeal, showing that the other de facto partner had received substantial relationship funds at time of separation thus further reducing what she is owed. Additionally, her occupation rent award was entirely set aside due to the contribution by this partner was comparatively minor.

Where couples had settled their properties into a trust during their marriage, and the trust now needs to be dissolved with breaking down of marriage, the Court can make such orders under s 182 of the Family Proceedings Act. We also have experience in this type of proceedings and can give you the appropriate advice.