ANDREW LITTLE to the Prime Minister: What are the priorities for the Government in assisting communities affected by yesterday’s earthquake?
MATT DOOCEY to the Minister of Finance: What advice has he received about the economic impact of the Kaikōura earthquake?
EUGENIE SAGE to the Minister of Transport: What updates can he give on the transport sector’s response to earthquake damage to State Highway 1 and the rail line between Seddon and Cheviot?
GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister of Finance: What is his initial assessment of the fiscal impact of yesterday morning’s earthquake and what, if any, new or changed Budget allocations is he considering in response to the earthquake?
PAUL FOSTER-BELL to the Minister of Civil Defence: How is the Government supporting people affected by the Kaikōura earthquake?
RON MARK to the Minister of Civil Defence: Can the Government assure New Zealanders on our level of preparedness for all natural disasters?
SUE MORONEY to the Minister of Transport: What roads and public transport services are currently not operational following damage from the earthquake yesterday and when is it expected access and services will be restored?
BRETT HUDSON to the Minister of Transport: What action is the Government taking to repair damaged transport infrastructure following the Kaikōura earthquake?
GARETH HUGHES to the Minister of Broadcasting: Will she join with me to acknowledge the work of all media in New Zealand, which is so important in times of natural disaster and crisis; if so, will she consider increasing our public broadcaster Radio New Zealand’s funding in Budget 2017?
CLAYTON MITCHELL to the Minister of Civil Defence: What progress has been made, if any, on new civil defence legislation which focuses on large and significant events such as the Christchurch and Kaikōura earthquakes?
ALASTAIR SCOTT to the Minister of Health: What updates has he received on the Government’s health response to the Kaikōura earthquake?
CLARE CURRAN to the Minister of Civil Defence: What actions have been taken by Civil Defence to ensure those people in the areas worst hit by the earthquake have enough food, clothing, water, and shelter?
The Canterbury earthquakes in 2010 and 2011 had a significant impact on landlords and tenants of commercial buildings in the city of Christchurch. The devastation wrought on the city was so severe that in an unprecedented response to this disaster a cordon was erected around the central business district for nearly two and half years while demolition, repairs and rebuilding took place. Despite the destruction, not all buildings were damaged. Many could have been occupied and used immediately if they had not been within the cordoned area. Others had only minor damage but repairs to them could not be commenced, let alone completed, owing to restrictions on access caused by the cordon. Tenants were faced with a major problem in that they could not access their buildings and it was likely to be a long time before they would be allowed access again. The other problem was uncertainty about the legal position as neither the standard form leases in use, nor any statute, provided for issues arising from an inaccessible building. The parties were therefore uncertain about their legal rights and obligations in this situation. Landlords and tenants were unsure whether tenants were required to pay rent for a building that could not be accessed or whether they could terminate their leases on the basis that the building was inaccessible. This thesis looks at whether the common law doctrine of frustration could apply to leases in these circumstances, where the lease had made no provision. It analyses the history of the doctrine and how it applies to a lease, the standard form leases in use at the time of the earthquakes and the unexpected and extraordinary nature of the earthquakes. It then reports on the findings of the qualitative empirical research undertaken to look at the experiences of landlords and tenants after the earthquakes. It is argued that the circumstances of landlords and tenants met the test for the doctrine of frustration. Therefore, the doctrine could have applied to leases to enable the parties to terminate them. It concludes with a suggestion for reform in the form of a new Act to govern the special relationship between commercial landlords and tenants, similar to legislation already in place covering other types of relationships like those in residential tenancies and employment. Such legislation could provide dispute resolution services to enable landlords and tenants to have access to justice to determine their legal rights at all times, and in particular, in times of crisis.
