Commercial Nature and sources of New Zealand Law

Question: Discuss about the Commercial Nature and sources of New Zealand Law. Answer: Healthy Homes Guarantee Bill (2) is responsible for amending the Residential Tenancies Law of 1986 with the purpose of ensuring that each rental home in New Zealand attains minimum standards of heating and insulation. The member of the parliament responsible for the bill is Andrew Little. He is a member of the Labour Party and also a leader of the Opposition. This bill is known as Member's bill because it got introduced by a member who is not a Minister. Bills that get submitted by members who themselves are not Ministers are referred as Member's bill. Such laws are allowed for debate on every second Wednesday. Healthy Homes Guarantee Bill (No 2) was first introduced in the parliament on 15th October 2015 and made available for the House to consider. Secondly, on 4th May 2016, the bill was read for the first time. After the reading of the law, 61 members supported the bill while 60 opposed. So far the Healthy Homes Guarantee Bill (No 2) is with the select committee, which is the third stage of the parliamentary process. Healthy Homes Guarantee Bill has received support from various organizations and sectors. For example, the New Zealand Medical Association (NZMA) being the largest medical group with so many members from all areas of medicine has recommended some amendments to the bill. The organization suggests that minimum standards developed for rental houses should get expanded to include safety requirements. They are saying that Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MDIE) should consider the concept of fuel poverty and WHO guidelines when considering indoor temperature. A rental home should have the capability of being heated to a good minimum temperature without incurring the unreasonable cost by tenants. The NZMA are suggesting that the focus should be on developing a standard on thermal effectiveness (Hanlon, 2015). After an emphasis on the bill, NZMA concluded with some recommendations that include broadening the scope of the Healthy Homes Bill and advance the timeframes for its realization if it is passed. The organization is concerned that the large population of the New Zealanders does not have access sufficient, warm, safe, dry, and affordable houses that are vital for health and well-being. They argue that everyday doctors attend to children who are sick because of living in damp, cold, and moldy houses. On the other hand, the report from the Office of the Children's Commission shows that the adverse effects of cold, moldy, and damp houses on children have led to 15 deaths and 42, 000 hospital admissions of children per year. Such houses also have adverse effects on vulnerable groups such as young children, older people, people with disabilities, and the employed because of spending most of their time in the house. Other various studies show that poor health results due to inadequate housing have significant community spending on tax and in lost productivity. A study done by the New Zealand Business Council for Sustainable Development suggested that having average thermal efficiency would lead to few people staying in the hospitals due to respiratory problems. Thermal efficiency would reduce the number of sickness days per year; thus, increasing productivity. Another study performed by the World- leading research in New Zealand found that enhanced health results can get achieved through housing interventions like retrofitting insulation and by providing improved heat sources (OECD Economic Surveys: New Zealand, 2015). After realizing the ethical and social importance of the Bill, the NZMA proposed that MBIE should set standards that require all the landlords to meet the rules. This requirement should get enforced once the Act comes into force. They actively support the core intent of the bill because they believe that it has the potential of improving the health of many of the vulnerable groups. On the other, the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that interior house temperatures should get maintained above 18 degrees. The New Zealand homes have indoor temperatures below 16 degrees and are more likely to be occupied by tenants than the house owners. Heating poor-quality houses are expensive; hence, contributing to the major issue of fuel poverty. Some organizations suggest that the Bill should have included safety issues in renting housing such as the provision of handrails in the stairs and grab rails in the bathrooms. Legislation The Residential Tenancy Act 1986 outlines the rights and the obligations of both the landlords and the tenants of residential properties (Duffy, 2016). The Act covers rentals based on the lease agreement, rent and bonds, the termination of the tenancies, and the obligations of both the tenants and the landlords. It also establishes the Tenancy Tribunal to cater fro the disputes between the landlord and the tenant. Section 5(1) of the Interpretation Act 1999 requires a person to first ascertain the standard, grammatical meaning of the provision. Second, determine if there is ambiguity, if there is any; continue if there is none stop there. Third, find out the purpose of the Act by looking at the law as a whole. Lastly, apply the standard rules of Law, which requires one to interpret the law according to the literal meaning of words. As in the case of Holler v Osaki, the judge concluded the case by saying that the text, policy and legislative history of section 142 of the Residential Tenancy Act support the interpretation contended for by the respondents. The advice that I will provide to Mr. Careless concerning his case may include: (1) the residential tenants are immune from the claim by the landlord where the rented property suffers damage or loss whether carelessly or intentionally to the extent provided in section 268 and 269 of the Property Law Act 2007. However, the parliament has not expressed this clearly for the Court to construe the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 and in a way that could achieve a different effect. On the other hand, Section 268 of the PLA 2007 shows that the tenant could be exonerated if he or she is insured. One of the regulations made according to the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 is the Building Act 2004 and the Building Code. It governs the construction of new buildings and the alteration and demolition of existing buildings (Gibbons, 2012). The Building Code sets out performance standards for work on all types of building. It covers structural stability, moisture control, durability among others. The enabling sections 136 and section 47. They are different from the Act of Parliament because they require notice before being applied. The ministry responsible for the administration of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 is Ministry of Business. The ways of controlling abuse of delegated legislation involve the use of parliament, standing committees, House of Lords Committee, Publication and Bibliography. Parliament retains some measure of checks. Scrutiny by Standing Committees draws parliaments attention on the important issues concerning legislations. The House of Lords Committee bring the attention of Parliament the more vital pieces of European legislation under the European Committee Act 1972 section 2(2). Classifications of Law Courts, Common Law, and Precedent The case Holler v Osaki is a civil case. It is useful to know because many people are faced with such scenarios in their daily life. There, the case is helpful to both the tenants and landlords (Levine, 2013). The area of law is public because it covers all the tenants and landlords, not just a single tenant or landlord. It is a universal law. The case Holler v Osaki was first heard in Wellington High Court. It is important to know where the court fits in the hierarchy of tribunals because each court handles different types of cases. Cases vary from Nature and sources of New Zealand law: law, ethics/morality and societal context Legislation: parliamentary process to adverse; therefore, each court will handle the case based on the magnitude. The courts that presided over the case Holler v Osaki are the High Court and the Court of Appeal. The high court is mandated to hear the case and make its judgment. On the other sides, when one party feels that the decision was wrong, it can proceed to Court of Appeal to continue with the case. Osaki won the case based on the analysis of the PLA and the RTA by the Court. There are no options for Holler because the case was held in the court of appeal. The importance of court law is that it prevents courts from contradicting themselves, and makes them never to oppose a court which is higher in the jurisdiction's hierarchy than the tribunals themselves. In the case, Holler v Osaki, the judgment that happened in the High Court was altered by the court of appeal, which is superior in the hierarchy. Yes, I think this case creates a binding precedent. The courts that will be bound by the decision are all the courts that are below the court of appeal in the hierarchy. The importance of pattern is that it provides the basis through which such cases in the future can get determined. Common law is an Act as declared by judges. The legislation is the major source of law, and every case starts with interpreting the legislation as made by Commonwealth and the States (Nelson, 2015). The legislation is a law made by the Parliament. It consists of Acts and Delegated Legislation. New Zealand Constitution The three branches of the New Zealand government are the Executive Branch, Executive Branch, and the Judicial Branch. The Executive branch is responsible for ensuring that the laws are carried out (Cox, 2013). On the other hand, the legislature is responsible for making laws, while the Judiciary branch is to ensure laws are correctly done and that laws abide by the constitution. Treaty of Waitangi 1.Article one of the Treaty of Waitangi states that the Chiefs of the Confederation and all the Chiefs who have not join the Confederation give absolutely to the Queen of England for ever the complete government over their land. The Second Article states that the Queen of England accepts to protect the chiefs, the subtribes and all the New Zealand people in the unqualified exercise of their chieftainship over their lands, villages and all their treasures (Hong, 2014). But on the other hand, the Chiefs of the Confederation and all the Chiefs will sell land to the Queen at a price agreed to by the owner and by the buyer appointed by the Queen as her purchase agent. Third Article states that the Queen of England will protect all the ordinary people of New Zealand and will give them the same rights and duties of citizenship as the people of England (Moon, 2005). 2.The Treaty Principles are the rules used in translating Waitangi Acts. There is no ultimate complete meaning of these principles because the official documents have referred to the treaty in general terms (Boast, 2016). 3.It is because the English and the Maori are not the direct translations of each other; thus, creating difficulties in interpretation. 4.For additional information please visit the following sources: Treaty of Waitangi | Northland Bay of Islands, New Zealand. (2017). Newzealand.com. Retrieved 5 April 2017, from https://www.newzealand.com/us/feature/treaty-of-waitangi/ Treaty of Waitangi - Te Tiriti o Waitangi - Archives New Zealand. Te Rua Mahara o te K?wanatanga. (2017). Archives.govt.nz. Retrieved 5 April 2017, from https://archives.govt.nz/exhibitions/treaty 5.The reason why the Treaty is essential to doing business in New Zealand is that it governs the relationship between the indigenous people (Maori), and everyone else and guarantees the rights of both Maori and Pakeha get protected. References Boast, R. P. (2016). The Waitangi Tribunal in the Context of New Zealand's Political Culture and Historiography. Journal Of The History Of International Law, 18(2/3), 339-361. Cox, N. (2013). Proposed Constitutional Reform in New Zealand: Constitutional Entrenchment, Written Constitutions and Legitimacy. Round Table, 102(1), 51-70. Duffy, B. (2016). In States We "Trust": Self-Settled Trusts, Public Policy, And Interstate Federalism. Northwestern University Law Review, 111(1), 205-238. Gibbons, T. (2012). The Tenancy Tribunal: Tensions of Jurisdiction, Coherence, and Economics. Otago Law Review, 12(4), 703-730. Gmez, L. D., Kwon, O., Dabirvaziri, M. R. (2015). Seismic fragility of steel moment-resisting frames in Vancouver and Montreal designed in the 1960s, 1980s, and 2010. Canadian Journal Of Civil Engineering, 42(11), 919-929. Hanlon, J. (2015). Fair Housing Policy and the Abandonment of Public Housing Desegregation. Housing Studies, 30(1), 78-99. Hong, B. (2014). National cultural indicators in New Zealand. Cultural Trends, 23(2), 93-108. Kozel, R. J. (2014). THE SCOPE OF PRECEDENT. Michigan Law Review, 113(2), 179-230. Levine, M. L. (2013). Tenancy in common is held to be a security. Real Estate Finance (Aspen Publishers Inc.), 30(1), 7-13. Moon, P. (2005). The Waitangi Tribunal and New Zealand History. American Historical Review, 110(2), 457-458. Nelson, C. (2015). The Legitimacy of (Some) Federal Common Law. Virginia Law Review, 101(1), 1-64. OECD Economic Surveys: New Zealand 2015. (2015). 2015(15), 1-150.