Property Law Bill

The debate on this part includes debate on schedule 2.

I will take a brief call to talk about Part 3, because again it deals with something that is really very practical for most New Zealanders, and that is mortgages. I think that an excellent job was done by the Law Commission in reporting on this particular area of the law, and I commend the Ministry of Justice, which took the commission’s report and dealt with some very complex issues of law reform in the area of land, and which has done it very well in Part 3.

There are a couple of minor amendments, but again I repeat what I said in the House during the second reading debate yesterday: the quality of work that was done is reflected in what is really the paucity of reports or comments from the Justice and Electoral Committee on this area. I think we recommended that clause 77A be inserted in the bill. The reason for that, as the commentary says, is to clarify the relationship between this bill and the Personal Property Securities Act. But, really, there is not too much of any great moment here that one needs to dwell on. It is one of those areas, as I have said in the House in the last few days in relation to other statutes, that one could spend a lot of time on or briefly summarise.

But the key point that needs to be made is that Part 3 brings together all the rules relating to mortgages and it is a splendid piece of work. That is all I think I need to say.

I would agree with both my colleagues who have spoken previously, and I say to Dr Worth that I, too, shared his sense of distress initially at seeing the doctrine of interesse termini being abolished. But I daresay it is something that one comes to terms with.

I also shared the views of my colleague Chris Finlayson in recognising that Part 3 is a very useful codification of mortgages, and other things. Just to deal with one particular aspect of that, and not to take the Committee’s time unduly, I bring to the attention of the Committee the terms and conditions of leases, where the Justice and Electoral Committee has recommended that an amendment be made to clause 142(2)(a) to require the inclusion of all renewal terms in the maximum lease term. The clause as introduced requires the term of lease entered into by a mortgagee in possession not to exceed 2 years in a residential tenancy or 15 years in any other case, except with the consent of the mortgagor or a court. The committee considered that the clause as introduced is ambiguous about whether renewal terms are included in the 15-year period, and the last thing one needs in mortgage agreements is ambiguity. Thank you.

The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 146 in the name of the Hon Clayton Cosgrove to Part 3 be agreed to.

Amendments agreed to.

Part 3 as amended agreed to.

Part 4 Leases of land