Common Legal Myths
3 August 2026

1. Myth: “The Property Relationships Act applies after 2 years!”


Wrong. Generally, the time period for a relationship to become what is known as a qualifying relationship under the Property (Relationships) Act 1976 is 3 years from the commencement of the relationship. This time period can be shorter if there is a child in the relationship or the applicant has made a substantial contribution to the relationship. The 2 year period is the period a married couple must be separated before the marriage can be dissolved (i.e. divorced).



2. Myth: “It’s my property – I can leave it to whomever I want!”


Wrong (sort of). This statement highlights the tension between what lawyers refer to as “testamentary freedom” that a Will-maker has and the rights certain persons have under various statutes and law. While it is true that a Will-maker can do what they want with their property, this is not absolute. A Court can order a different distribution where a Will-maker fails in what is known as their “moral duty” to make “proper maintenance and support” for family members.


In addition, partners have rights under the Property (Relationships) Act 1976, and the Law Reform (Testamentary Promises) Act 1949 can assist persons to whom the Will-maker has made promises to provide for them in return for work or services done in the Will-maker’s lifetime.


The rules of equity may also affect the Will-maker’s testamentary freedom.



3. Myth: “I’ve been in a relationship for 30 years, surely I can make decisions for my partner who has lost mental capacity!”


Wrong. Despite the length of a relationship (marriage/de facto/civil union) if one of the partners loses mental capacity the other partner has no right to make decisions for their incapacitated partner in relation to their property and/or their personal care and welfare, unless the incapacitated partner has completed Enduring Powers of Attorney.


If the incapacitated partner has not completed Enduring Powers of Attorney applications to the Family Court will need to be made for the appointment of a Property Manager (or Administrator if there are not significant assets) and a Welfare Guardian.



4. Myth: “I can buy/sell a house without a lawyer involved”


Wrong (sort of). In theory, a layperson can buy or sell a home without the involvement of a lawyer but (and it is a big but) it would be very difficult to do so (not to mention the risk of doing so).


If bank lending is involved, the bank will insist on the involvement of a lawyer to act on its behalf and may even decline to lend if a buyer is not legally represented. Even if the bank was prepared to lend it is likely it and its lawyers would impose so many conditions and requirements (in order to protect the bank’s position) that it may be practically too difficult for a buyer act for themselves.


Furthermore, with the land register now being predominantly electronic, relying on lawyers with the requisite certifications, it will be difficult for a non-licenced person to transact the registrations. Again, in theory, these can be done manually in paper form, but the formalities involved in doing so are likely to make it practically difficult (if not impossible) for a buyer or seller to do so.

 

This is general information about the current law, not advice on a specific matter. 


Article by: Kevin Callinicos

Join our Newsletter

Stay tuned

Contact Us

20 September 2026
He taonga to mokopuna, kia whāngaia, kia tipu, kia rea - a child is a treasure, to be nurtured, to grow, to flourish. A common thing we hear from clients is "I want custody of my children." While most people understand what "custody" means, the reality is that custody is no longer a legal term used in New Zealand family law. In fact, the term was removed from our legislation more than 20 years ago. So, what changed? The Care of Children Act 2004 replaced the old concepts of "custody" and "access" with language that focuses more directly on children's needs and parental responsibilities. Instead of talking about custody, the Family Court now talks about: Day-to-day care (who the child lives with and who looks after them on a daily basis); and Contact (the time a child spends with a parent or other important person when they are not in that person's care). The change was intentional. The law moved away from language that can sound like a child is something to be "owned" or "won" by one parent. What does "day-to-day care" mean? Day-to-day care refers to the practical care of a child, including: Where the child lives; Their daily routine; School attendance; Meals, bedtime, and general supervision; and The everyday decisions involved in raising them. A parent can have: Sole day-to-day care; or Shared day-to-day care arrangements. There is no legal presumption that one parent should have day-to-day care over the other. The Court's focus is always on what is in the child's welfare and best interests. What about "contact"? What many people previously called "access" is now referred to as contact . Contact can take many forms, including: Weekend visits; School holiday time; Telephone calls; Video calls; Supervised contact; or Other arrangements that allow a child to maintain a relationship with an important person. The Court recognises that children generally benefit from having ongoing relationships with both parents, provided doing so is safe and in their best interests. Does this mean I can't say "custody"? Not at all. Many people still use terms like "custody," "shared custody," and "access" in everyday conversation, and most lawyers will understand exactly what you mean. However, if you're involved in Family Court proceedings, you'll hear terms such as: Day-to-day care Contact Guardianship Parenting orders These are the legal concepts that will appear in Court documents and orders. Why does the language matter? The shift away from "custody" reflects a broader change in how New Zealand family law views parenting after separation. Rather than focusing on which parent "gets" the child, the law focuses on: The child's welfare and best interests; Maintaining important relationships; Encouraging parents to work together where possible; and Ensuring children are protected from harm. Ultimately, Family Court decisions are not about determining a "winner" and a "loser." They are about creating arrangements that best support the child's wellbeing. As family lawyers , we offer advice, guidance and representation in family law matters, if you would like assistance or to talk to someone, contact us today. Written by: Eva Leutele
A designed graphic with a photo of Casey Hucker, and her name on a black background with red and white text
14 September 2026
Meet Casey Hucker, Property Law Partner at Willis Legal, dedicated to guiding clients through property law. Contact us for expert legal assistance today!
Close-up of a man's hands typing on a laptop
8 September 2026
The age of AI is rapidly changing many aspects of our lives, however, AI has perils for lay people using it to draft legal documents or obtain legal advice.
Show More