Arbitration and Mediation of Disputes Involving Trusts Get the Green Light in New Zealand

In a watershed moment on Wednesday of this week, the New Zealand Parliament passed the Trusts Bill which contains unique and important provisions that expressly provide for arbitration and mediation of internal and external disputes involving trusts, including for court ordered arbitration or mediation for internal matters but with some added protections.
Author(s): John Green
A nighttime view of the Houses of Parliament and Big Ben in London, illuminated by lights, with the River Thames in the foreground. The sky has a gradient from blue to twilight with some scattered clouds. The Union Jack flag is flying atop the building.

Claims brought by or against a trustee in relation to the trust or disputes in relation to the trust between a trustee and a beneficiary, or between a trustee and a third party, or between two or more trustees may be referred to arbitration or mediation, but not a dispute about the validity of all or part of the trust. 

If a trust has any beneficiaries who are unascertained or lack capacity the court must appoint representatives for those persons and any settlement agreement reached at mediation in relation to an internal matter must be approved by the court. 

In its 2011 report, the Law Commission estimated there were between 300,000 and 500,000 trusts in New Zealand. That number has likely increased substantially since then and it is inevitable that there will be a large number of disputes as trusts set up in the 80s and 90s start to fail and others become dysfunctional as relationships break down and relationship property and assets need to be divided or the holding mechanisms restructured to meet the changed circumstances. 

Arbitration and mediation plainly offer many advantages over litigation for the resolution of trusts disputes as the cost of High Court litigation (including multiple levels of appeal) and open justice are frequently seen as unwelcome features. With respect to arbitration, the speed and flexibility of arbitral procedure, the privacy and confidentiality of arbitration, the choice of and access to the decision maker, and the enforceability of arbitration awards are all factors that weigh strongly in its favour. As a further alternative, mediation provides parties with an efficient, confidential and cost-effective process that empowers the parties themselves to be the ‘decision-makers’ by allowing them to come together to find an amicable resolution to their dispute with the assistance of a highly skilled, experienced and knowledgeable Family Law mediator. 

There are many other consequential benefits and opportunities that will inevitably flow from the introduction of this important and globally innovative piece of legislation including that trusts will likely be better managed as justice will be more accessible, New Zealand will be recognised as an attractive jurisdiction for the administration of trusts with the upshot being that: New Zealand law will be selected as the governing law for foreign trusts; New Zealand will be the juridical seat for arbitration; and NZDRC (including the FDR Centre – its specialist subsidiary family dispute resolution services Registry) and NZIAC are ideally positioned to handle the expected growth in trusts disputes both domestically and internationally. 

NZIAC provides private dispute resolution services, including arbitration, mediation and arb-med, with respect to a wide range of disputes including those arising out of commercial trusts in the international context. 

NZIAC’s related registry services, FDR Centre and NZDRC provide private dispute resolution services, including arbitration, mediation and arb-med, with respect to domestic family law disputes and domestic commercial disputes respectively. 

Other resources you might like

If you found this article helpful and are interested in learning more, there is a wealth of other resources available on our website. We have a wide array of articles and guides on a variety of topics, each designed to provide you with a deeper understanding of the subject matter. We encourage you to explore these resources and deepen your knowledge.

A smiling older man in a suit, holding a tablet and using a stylus pen, sits at a desk with light streaming in from a window behind him. He appears to be engaged in an electronic arbitration agreement on the tablet.
Arbitration

Sign of the times: enforcing an arbitration agreement exchanged by electronic counterparts

In the electronic era, documents often do not exist in physical form. Does this affect their enforceability? Recent decisions from Australia and New Zealand show that our mindset about what an original or duly certified copy is might need to change when it comes to enforcing foreign arbitral awards.
Learn more
Close-up of three pieces of Whittaker & Sons dark chocolate with a textured surface, partially stacked on each other. The image highlights the rich, dark brown color and rough edges of the chocolate pieces against a blurred brown background.
Arbitration

Husky Food Importers & Distributors Ltd v JH Whittaker & Sons Ltd [2022] ONSC 1679

New Zealand confectionary and chocolate manufacturer, JH Whittaker & Sons Ltd (Whittaker’s), has brought a successful motion to stay litigation commenced against it by Husky Food Importers & Distributors Ltd (Husky) in the Ontario courts in Canada. The Ontario Superior Court of Justice found it was arguable that a valid arbitration agreement existed and that the dispute was covered by the arbitration agreement, and referred the parties to arbitration administered by the New Zealand International Arbitration Centre (NZIAC).

Not only is the decision to be applauded given its adherence to orthodoxy regarding the ‘competence-competence’ principle and its pro-arbitration stance, it provides valuable lessons for drafting – particularly with respect to the incorporation of standard terms of trade.
Learn more
Arbitration

When the math matters: NZDRC arbitrator gets rent review right

Rent review disputes might not make headlines, but when they end up in arbitration — and then in the High Court — the details matter. A recent case involving a decision of one of NZDRC’s arbitrators, Catherine Green, is a good reminder of why getting the numbers right is so important.
Learn more

Get in touch

Contact our team today to see how we can help

Contact us

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.