<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rssdatehelper="urn:rssdatehelper"><channel><title>COMPANY NAME Blog Updates</title><link>http://www.companyname.co.nz</link><pubDate></pubDate><generator>umbraco</generator><description> </description><language>en</language><item><title>The Good Oil on the Food Bill</title><link>http://www.companyname.co.nz/topnav/blog/2012/2/2/the-good-oil-on-the-food-bill.aspx</link><pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 11:35:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://www.companyname.co.nz/topnav/blog/2012/2/2/the-good-oil-on-the-food-bill.aspx</guid><content:encoded><![CDATA[ 
<p>The Bill replaces the Food Act 1981 with its focus on "walls,
floors and ceilings" with a risk-based approach to food safety
focusing on the processes and practices involved in keeping food
safe. The Bill introduces a range of tools that can be applied by
individuals and businesses which sell or supply food in exchange
for payment, depending on the risk posed by that particular food or
the business making or supplying the food.</p>

<p>High risk manufacturers such as baby food manufacturers or
businesses that sell food such as restaurants will face the highest
level of requirements. They must operate under food control plans
providing a series of measures against which a food operator can
manage their food business.</p>

<p>Medium risk food businesses such as bakeries face "national
programme" regulations which propose a more generic and flexible
approach to food safety. The regulations will have three levels of
national programme and the levels which need to be attained will
vary according to the risk posed by the business.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Low risk food businesses face a non-regulatory approach. Food
handler guidance will be available to low risk practices (such as
fund raising events, bed and breakfast operators, farmers market
stall holders). These are an educative set of tips on how to
produce and keep safe food.</p>

<p>With the Bill likely to be enacted sometime this year,
businesses will need to take advice so that they are aware of their
obligations and ensure they comply.</p>

<p>For more information on the Food Bill and to track its progress
through Parliament click <a
href="http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/Legislation/Bills/8/9/c/00DBHOH_BILL9974_1-Food-Bill.htm"
 target="_blank">here</a>.</p>

<p>If you are in the business of manufacturing and or selling food
and would like advice on the extent of your compliance obligations
under the proposed bill, please contact your usual Martelli McKegg
contact or <a href="/our-team/emma-hunter.aspx" target="_blank"
title="Emma Hunter">Emma Hunter</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>The Australian PPSA</title><link>http://www.companyname.co.nz/topnav/blog/2012/1/26/the-australian-ppsa.aspx</link><pubDate>Thu, 26 Jan 2012 15:52:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://www.companyname.co.nz/topnav/blog/2012/1/26/the-australian-ppsa.aspx</guid><content:encoded><![CDATA[ 
<p>As in New Zealand, the Act creates a single register for all
security interests in property other than land and buildings.&nbsp;
Charges over companies that were previously registered on ASIC will
now be registered on the PPSR.&nbsp; Some existing charges will be
automatically transferred. Holders of other security interests will
have a transitional period within which to re-register.</p>

<p>Businesses selling products under retention of title
arrangements or in the business of leasing or bailing equipment
will now be able to register the security interest created by those
arrangements.&nbsp; Those who don't may lose priority to general
security holders.&nbsp; It will therefore be crucial for those
businesses to review and update their terms of trade and customer
contracts and implement processes for registering their
interests.</p>

<p>If you believe your business might be affected or you have any
queries in this area, please contact your usual Martelli McKegg
contact or one of our commercial partners, <a
href="mailto:mcw@martellimckegg.co.nz">Mike Worsnop</a> , <a
href="mailto:awn@martellimckegg.co.nz">Andrew Nicoll</a> or <a
href="mailto:mh@martellimckegg.co.nz">Melissa Higham</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>The Financial Assistance Package fails to attract many leaky home owners</title><link>http://www.companyname.co.nz/topnav/blog/2012/1/19/the-financial-assistance-package-fails-to-attract-many-leaky-home-owners.aspx</link><pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 10:12:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://www.companyname.co.nz/topnav/blog/2012/1/19/the-financial-assistance-package-fails-to-attract-many-leaky-home-owners.aspx</guid><content:encoded><![CDATA[ 
<p>This statistic is not surprising given that many leaky home
owners have a valid claim against the Council that can lead to an
award of 100% of repair costs plus consequential costs (for example
alternative accommodation) and general damages of between $15,000
and $25,000 for stress and anxiety. Unlike payments under the FAP,
an award of damages is paid to the home owner and not to
contractors.</p>

<p>The official figures also suggest a waning of confidence in the
Weathertight Homes Tribunal with less than a third of claimants who
chose to pursue their claim doing so through the Tribunal rather
than alternative jurisdictions such as the District Court or the
High Court.</p>

<p>The claims statistics can be reviewed at <a
href="http://www.dbh.govt.nz/ws-claims"
target="_blank">www.dbh.govt.nz/ws-claims</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>1 January deadline for warranties in Australia</title><link>http://www.companyname.co.nz/topnav/blog/2011/12/21/1-january-deadline-for-warranties-in-australia.aspx</link><pubDate>Wed, 21 Dec 2011 12:32:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://www.companyname.co.nz/topnav/blog/2011/12/21/1-january-deadline-for-warranties-in-australia.aspx</guid><content:encoded><![CDATA[ 
<p>The new law is extremely strict.&nbsp; It will in all likelihood
require you to change your packaging to ensure you comply.</p>

<p>The warranty must be in a document that is "transparent",
meaning it is expressed in reasonably plain language, is legible
and is presented clearly.&nbsp; The warranty must state:</p>

<ul>
<li>what the person who gives the warranty must do so that the
warranty may be honoured - for example, the supplier will repair
the goods or replace the goods within a certain time period</li>

<li>what the consumer must do to entitle the consumer to claim the
warranty - for example, contact the supplier or manufacturer and
point to the defect</li>

<li>the following details in relation to the person giving the
warranty: the person's name, business address, telephone number and
email address (if any)</li>

<li>the period within which a defect in the goods or services to
which the warranty relates must appear if the consumer is entitled
to claim the warranty</li>

<li>the procedure for the consumer to claim the warranty including
the address to which a claim may be sent</li>

<li>who will bear the expense of claiming the warranty and if the
expense is to be borne by the person who gives the warranty - how
the consumer can claim expenses incurred in making the claim</li>

<li>a warranty against defects must state that the benefits to the
consumer given by the warranty are in addition to other rights and
remedies of the consumer under a law in relation to the goods or
services to which the warranty relates, and</li>

<li>the document must also contain the following mandatory
statement:</li>
</ul>

<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>Our goods come with guarantees
that cannot be excluded under the Australian Consumer Law. You are
entitled to a replacement or refund for a major failure and for
compensation for any other reasonably foreseeable loss or damage.
You are also entitled to have the goods repaired or replaced if the
goods fail to be of acceptable quality and the failure does not
amount to a major failure.</em></p>

<p>If you would like further information on how this law may affect
your business, please contact <a href="/our-team/melissa-higham.aspx"
title="Melissa Higham">Melissa Higham</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>High Court the court of last resort for leaky home owners</title><link>http://www.companyname.co.nz/topnav/blog/2011/12/16/high-court-the-court-of-last-resort-for-leaky-home-owners.aspx</link><pubDate>Fri, 16 Dec 2011 10:16:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://www.companyname.co.nz/topnav/blog/2011/12/16/high-court-the-court-of-last-resort-for-leaky-home-owners.aspx</guid><content:encoded><![CDATA[ 
<p>The Osbornes' claim against Auckland Council had previously been
thrown out by the WHT. The basis of that decision was that although
the Code Compliance Certificate had been issued by the Council
within ten years of their claim being brought, the Tribunal found
that the house had been built (physical construction had been
completed) more than ten years prior to the claim. The claim
therefore did not meet the WHT's eligibility criteria of having
been built within ten years.</p>

<p><em>Osborne &amp; Osborne v Auckland City Council</em> HC AK CIV
2010-404-006582 [30 November 2011].</p>
]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Vendors Breathe Sigh of Relief</title><link>http://www.companyname.co.nz/topnav/blog/2011/12/5/vendors-breathe-sigh-of-relief.aspx</link><pubDate>Mon, 05 Dec 2011 15:42:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://www.companyname.co.nz/topnav/blog/2011/12/5/vendors-breathe-sigh-of-relief.aspx</guid><content:encoded><![CDATA[ 
<h4>First claim dismissed: that the vendors were developers</h4>

<p>The vendors had arranged to have a home built for themselves on
a property where they were also redeveloping commercial premises.
This commercial element was found to be insufficient to conflate
their role to that of a developer, rather than simply a land owner
arranging to have a home built.</p>

<h4>Second claim dismissed: breach of vendors' warranty</h4>

<p>This is welcome confirmation that the warranty in the Eighth
Edition of the ADLS standard agreement has been successfully
redrafted. In contrast to interpretations of the onerous warranty
in the Seventh Edition, vendors are no longer taken to have given a
blanket warranty that building work completed during their
ownership complies with the Building Code.</p>

<p>The Tribunal found that the essence of the warranty in its
current form is that:</p>

<ul>
<li><em>"they obtained the necessary resource and building consents
for any work done that required such consents; and</em></li>

<li><em>they carried out the work in accordance with those
consents; and</em></li>

<li><em>at the end of the job they obtained a Code Compliance
Certificate."</em></li>
</ul>

<p>Vendors who have had building work done may still be caught out
if the work is:</p>

<ul>
<li>not carried out in accordance with the building consent</li>

<li>proves to be defective causing damage.</li>
</ul>

<p>If you have carried out building work, you should therefore
always seek legal advice before selling your property.</p>

<p>Unfortunately for the claimants in <em>Keven Investments Ltd v
Arthur &amp; ORS</em>, their claim against the director of the
insolvent building company also failed. There was no evidence of
his personal involvement in the defective building work.</p>

<p>The Tribunal's decision in this case is under appeal to the High
Court.</p>
]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Plain English Awards</title><link>http://www.companyname.co.nz/topnav/blog/2011/11/15/plain-english-awards.aspx</link><pubDate>Tue, 15 Nov 2011 07:38:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://www.companyname.co.nz/topnav/blog/2011/11/15/plain-english-awards.aspx</guid><content:encoded><![CDATA[ 
<p>In naming Martelli McKegg as a finalist the judges had this to
say:</p>

<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><em>This firm seems to have made a
genuine effort to demystify the legal world - to its credit. The
site uses plain English and informal language well to explain the
company. The use of pronouns and stories make this law firm feel
approachable, as in the explanation of how the client relationship
works.</em></p>

<p>Click <a
href="http://www.plainenglishawards.org.nz/best-plain-english-website-private-sector-2011/"
 target="_blank">here</a> to read more about the awards.</p>
]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>"A Rotten Shame" - a finalist for 2011 NZ Film Award</title><link>http://www.companyname.co.nz/topnav/blog/2011/11/14/a-rotten-shame---a-finalist-for-2011-nz-film-award.aspx</link><pubDate>Mon, 14 Nov 2011 08:06:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://www.companyname.co.nz/topnav/blog/2011/11/14/a-rotten-shame---a-finalist-for-2011-nz-film-award.aspx</guid><content:encoded><![CDATA[ 
<p>'A Rotten Shame' follows John Gray from the Home Owners and
Buyers Association of New Zealand (HOBANZ) as he challenges
industry experts and politicians to explain why so many New
Zealanders are suffering with leaky homes.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
A Rotten Shame is an insightful documentary and includes interviews
with home owners represented by our firm.&nbsp;</p>
]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Council held liable for 100 percent</title><link>http://www.companyname.co.nz/topnav/blog/2011/11/10/council-held-liable-for-100-percent.aspx</link><pubDate>Thu, 10 Nov 2011 16:57:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://www.companyname.co.nz/topnav/blog/2011/11/10/council-held-liable-for-100-percent.aspx</guid><content:encoded><![CDATA[ 
<p>Claims against the developer in relation to those units were
dismissed on limitation grounds.&nbsp; This decision shows that
Territorial Authorities may bear the full burden of liability if
claims in respect of acts or omissions by other parties are barred
by s393 of the Building Act 2004.</p>

<p>We represented the claimants in this proceeding.</p>
]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Neil McKegg</title><link>http://www.companyname.co.nz/topnav/blog/2011/11/8/neil-mckegg.aspx</link><pubDate>Tue, 08 Nov 2011 12:54:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://www.companyname.co.nz/topnav/blog/2011/11/8/neil-mckegg.aspx</guid><content:encoded><![CDATA[ 
<p>Neil McKegg was a man of many parts, golfer, lawyer, Island
trader, diplomat, businessman, husband and father.&nbsp; His was
not an ordinary life.</p>

<p>Neil's father, Robert McKegg (or Boss as he was universally
called), had purchased the Cook Islands Trading Company (CITC) in
1916.&nbsp; Boss met Neil's mother, Irene Pearson, in 1920 on board
ship.&nbsp; The ship was&nbsp; bringing Boss back to Rarotonga from
San Francisco where he had just purchased the schooner SS Tagua and
Irene (known as Bessie) was returning to New Zealand after an
overseas holiday.&nbsp; They married within a year.&nbsp; Neil's
mother was credited as the source of Neil's sporting prowess,
particularly his golf.&nbsp; Boss and Irene had their first son,
Henley, in 1921 and in 1931 Neil was born.&nbsp; As brother Henley
had been sent off to boarding school in NZ at age five the young
Neil spent an idyllic childhood in Rarotonga trailing his father
around and enjoying life on the plantation as an only child.
&nbsp;Neil did get some schooling at Nikau Side School but the
difficult economic times of the 30s compelled the McKeggs to put
CITC under management.&nbsp; In 1939 the McKeggs moved back,
initially to Auckland and then to Christchurch where Robert was
employed as General Manager of AM Satterthwaite.&nbsp; Neil's real
schooling started with a stint at Kings Prep then boarding at Scots
College and finally as a day pupil at St Andrews College in
Christchurch.</p>

<p>After finishing his schooling in 1948 Neil went on to university
at Auckland studying law where in 1952 he was fortunate to have
Sandra (Craig) Wigglesworth introduce him to fellow student Diane
Henderson, who was studying French, German and Latin.&nbsp; Diane
was the only daughter of Hubert Henderson, a noted educationalist,
and a French woman, Louise Henderson. &nbsp;Louise, later Dame
Louise Henderson, was one of New&nbsp;Zealand's most influential
artists. Within six&nbsp;months Neil and Diane were married.&nbsp;
Both were still students, though Neil had a job as a law clerk at
Hesketh &amp; Richmond. In 1954 their first daughter, Adriane, was
born followed a year later by Ashleigh.&nbsp; Neil was admitted to
the bar on 11 February 1955.</p>

<p>In December 1955, Neil and Diane moved to Rarotonga with their
two young daughters to spend a couple of years learning what the
CITC was all about just in case, as Boss had told Neil, he had to
run the company one day.&nbsp; In those days, Rarotonga could only
be accessed by sea and cargo had to be loaded into lighters and
brought in over the reef.&nbsp; There would have been few
facilities compared to New Zealand, tourism was unknown and medical
facilities were relatively primitive. It was a challenging place to
move to with two young babies.</p>

<p>On his return to Auckland, Neil acquired the law practice of EM
Powell in approximately 1957 or 1958 and commenced business as a
lawyer on his own account.&nbsp; The couple's third daughter Simone
was born in 1959 and a year later Neil was joined in practice by
Robert Alexander Adams-Smith, another Christchurch lad, and the
firm became known as McKegg and Adams-Smith.&nbsp;</p>

<p>This would have been a difficult period in Neil's life.
&nbsp;His father Robert had died in 1958 and only three years later
Neil's brother Henley, a director of CITC and expected to take over
the running of the family business, died suddenly at the age of
39.&nbsp; With the deaths of Neil's father and brother CITC was
again put under management.</p>

<p>The law practice of McKegg &amp; Adams-Smith flourished during
the early 60s and by 1963 the firm was already well known around
the city.&nbsp; Neil in his inimitable way had got to know people
as far apart as Bob Law then the Auckland Manager of National
Mutual and Bill Crozier who was the building janitor.&nbsp; The
firm of course did work for both.&nbsp; Bob Adams-Smith, meanwhile,
who specialised in personal injury and other insurance work was
doing a huge amount of work for NZI.&nbsp;</p>

<p>The 1960s was a time of sweeping change.&nbsp; In 1965 the Cook
Islands became independent with Albert Henry becoming its first
premier.&nbsp;</p>

<p>With the coming of independence to the Cooks, Neil could foresee
that there would be many opportunities for a company like
CITC.&nbsp; An international airport had already been mooted and in
1968 Neil with then Minister of Finance Rob Muldoon flew to
Rarotonga in an Air New Zealand DC6 to discuss the building of an
international airport.&nbsp; 1968 also sparked a change in Neil's
law practice.&nbsp; With all that was happening in the world of
commerce, Neil had determined that he needed to spend a lot more of
his time in the Cook Islands if he was to take advantage of the
opportunities then arising.&nbsp; CITC also needed a firm hand
following a period of local management.&nbsp;</p>

<p>That gave Noel Anderson, now a member of the Supreme Court, and
me our opportunity and we were both admitted to partnership on 1
April 1968.&nbsp; Neil from that date stepped back quite
significantly from his legal commitments.&nbsp;</p>

<p>It was also a time of significant change within the legal
profession.&nbsp; In 1965 McKegg &amp; Adams-Smith had moved to the
8<sup>th</sup> Floor of the new ANZ Bank building on the corner of
Queen and Victoria Streets.&nbsp; We shared that floor with two
other businesses, APA Discount Corporation, a company run by Hugh
Wilkinson, and the partnership of Price Waterhouse &amp; Co.&nbsp;
It is amazing to think that in 1965 there were only four local
partners for Price Waterhouse &amp; Co, Mac Luke, Geoff Todd,
Dinass Dass and Lloyd Edwards.&nbsp; But merger was in the wind
with Russell McVeagh merging with McKenzie &amp; Bartleet in 1969
to create a specialised commercial law and company department. Then
on 1 April 1970, McKegg &amp; Adams-Smith merged with Martelli
&amp; Martelli to become Martelli McKegg &amp; Adams-Smith.&nbsp;
On that date, Neil's interest in the partnership was bought out and
his legal career effectively ended, although he generously remained
as a consultant for many years after and was always a strong
supporter of the firm where he retained an office. Neil was also
instrumental in arranging for Dame Louise Henderson to hang a
collection of her works in our law firm offices and he continued to
refer friends and acquaintances to the firm. A collection of Dame
Louise's works are still here today.</p>

<p>So started a new episode in the McKegg household.&nbsp; The much
loved family bach at Leigh was sold; Neil spent the next three
years in Rarotonga running CITC on his own while Diane stayed in NZ
caring for their three girls and their schooling.</p>

<p>The forced separation put a lot of pressure on Neil who had
taken on wider responsibilities within his beloved Cook
Islands.&nbsp; When, in 1969, Neil went to the UK to raise money to
purchase a competitor he also took with him the contract to build
the new international airport to see if a contractor could be
found.&nbsp; Neil met William Keswick (known as Tony) taipan of
Jardine Mathieson, a governer of the Bank of England and a director
of BP. &nbsp;Jardine Mathieson agreed not only to provide the money
but to buy a 25% interest in the expanded CITC.&nbsp; Neil's skills
were also instrumental in persuading Jardines to agree to construct
the airport through their Hong Kong company Gammon.&nbsp; The
airport contract eventually let to a joint venture Gammon - Milne
Construction, and was signed by Ralph Hanan, Minister of Maori and
Island affairs, and Albert Henry in February 1969.&nbsp; The
airport, with Neil as its first director, was officially opened on
29 January 1974 by Her Majesty the Queen who had flown direct from
London to Rarotonga.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Neil was a keen and talented golfer, first winning the Club
Championship at the Auckland Golf Club in 1961.&nbsp; In 1966 Neil
won his second club championship at Middlemore, 36 holes on a wet
and windy day - a magnificent effort for a man who had to take off
and wipe his glasses before almost every shot.&nbsp; He was club
captain in 1970 and 1971 and president in 1979 and 1980.</p>

<p>The 20 year period from 1981 to 2001 was probably the most
stable and happiest time in the lives of Neil and Diane.&nbsp; Over
that period they lived and worked in Rarotonga.&nbsp; Diane became
a buyer for CITC and then started Alliance Francaise there.&nbsp;
She was appointed the French Consul in 1989 while Neil acted as the
British Consul.</p>

<p>Neil continued to oversee the Cook Islands Trading
Corporation.&nbsp; At the same time he passionately and single
mindedly espoused projects which would benefit the Cook Islands or
railed against policies which hindered them.&nbsp; As a stalwart of
the local golf course he encouraged local Cook Islanders to play
and become members. Neil then guided the company through its
centenary in 1991 and on 31 December 1991 Neil was awarded the
Order of the British Empire for his services to Rarotonga.</p>

<p>During those 20 years, Neil and Diane also found time to mind
the store in Aitutaki, spent time in France where Neil attended a
French language school in Villefranche sur Mer, and Diane became a
typical French housewife and voyaged around the Marquesas in a
little cargo vessel which carried just a few passengers</p>

<p>Neil who had a heart attack at 45 and a bypass operation in
1989, had continual problems with his health from the mid
1980s.&nbsp;</p>

<p>It never stopped him from extending the hospitality, for which
the McKeggs were renowned, to a constant stream of visitors to
Rarotonga.</p>

<p>Neil and Diane returned to New Zealand in 2001 to live a life
which by their standards must have been quite ordinary.</p>

<p>I have tried to give you a glimpse of Neil's extraordinary
life.&nbsp; He was a man of many parts and yet I have only given
you a peek at Neil's public persona, his life as a lawyer,
entrepreneur, island trader, and business man.&nbsp; Neil was a man
of immense charm, fair-minded, loyal, and constant.&nbsp; He was
intensely proud of his family and their achievements but his own
achievements would not have been possible without the constant
support of a close and loving family.</p>

<p>Neil is survived by his wife Diane, their three daughters, 11
grandchildren and one great grandson.</p>

<p>Philip Wells, November 2011</p>
]]></content:encoded></item></channel></rss>

